- From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip <pbaker@verisign.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 10:56:46 -0800
- To: "'Yassir Elley'" <yassir.elley@sun.com>, "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>
- Cc: www-xkms@w3.org
The problem with this proposal is that it is not possible to extend the enumeration at a later date which is definietely not what we want. TransactionID within Keybinding may be necessary for the registration functions, I have not yet worked out if this is the case. > A few comments on the schema: > > 1) REPLACE > <element name="RespondWith" type="QName"/> > WITH > <element name="RespondWith" type="RespondWithEnumType"/> > > 2) REPLACE > <complexType name="ResultAbstractType" abstract="true"> > ... > <attribute name="ResultMinor" type="QName" use="required"/> > ... > </complexType> > WITH > <complexType name="ResultAbstractType" abstract="true"> > ... > <attribute name="ResultMinor" > type="xkms:MinorResultCodeEnumType" use="required"/> > ... > </complexType> > > 3) Now that we have added TransactionID as an attribute of > MessageAbstractType, > we should get rid of it as an attribute of KeyBindingType. We > should also get rid of: > <element name="TransactionID" type="string"/> > > 4) What is the purpose of the "ID" attribute which is part of > KeyBindingType. > Can we get rid of this now: > <attribute name="ID" type="ID" use="optional"/>
Received on Friday, 29 March 2002 13:55:57 UTC