W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa@w3.org > April 2003

Re: profiles/modules/levels -- 2 of 2

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 09:38:28 -0600
Message-Id: <>
To: david_marston@us.ibm.com
Cc: www-qa@w3.org

At 11:02 PM 4/22/03 -0400, david_marston@us.ibm.com wrote:

>Regarding XQuery conformance requirements, Lofton wrote:
> >I must be misunderstanding.  I thought you said in your prose (above the
> >diagram) that having the Static Typing Module requires that you have the
> >Schema Import Module, and having the latter requires that you also have
> >the Basic Module.
> >I did not think that you meant, Static Typic contains Schema Import, and
> >Schema Import contains Basic. *This* would be a layered relationship....
>They're criss-crossing the verbiage: "XQuery defines a basic conformance
>level named Basic XQuery, and two optional features called the Schema
>Import Feature and the Static Typing Feature."
>I think the best practice is for them to decide the relationships they
>want, treating the "features" as what we call modules,

That matches my understanding of the partitioning.

>then switch to
>the levels terminology only if all can be arranged in a hierarchy.

Yes, if it can be arranged in a hierarchy of *containment*.  I.e., SI level 
(level 3) contains ST level (level 2), which in turn contains BX level 
(level 1).  However this is not how I understand the relationships, from 
your description.

What we seem to have is a "hierarchy of dependence".  That is not 
levels.  I do NOT want to introduce new terminology (or DoV) into SpecGL, 
but it might be described as "layered".

>They may be trying to say a processor can conform at one of three
>levels, in which case conformance at the Static Typing level "contains"
>all the others, even though Static Typing when treated as a module
>("feature") does not contain Schema Import.
>In those immortal words: I hope that makes clear the unclarity of it.

It does.  I think you could serve a valuable role by working with Xquery to 
clarify it, at this early stage, per above discussions.  If we're having 
trouble understanding, then I would expect that others might as well.

Received on Friday, 25 April 2003 11:36:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:43:21 UTC