W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xkms@w3.org > October 2004

Re: updated schema

From: Shivaram Mysore <shivarammysore@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 16:39:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20041008233912.46101.qmail@web51506.mail.yahoo.com>
To: jose.kahan@w3.org
Cc: XKMS WG <www-xkms@w3.org>
A pointer that may be of use for talking is:
which talks about URIs for W3C namespaces.
It is not clear from the document the impact of move from CR to Recommendation and changes to namespace'd document (xkms.xsd in this case).  Till CR, making changes is not a problem.
The below paragraph:

   Namespace URIs SHOULD follow the conventions for Recommendation Track documents in order to ease the later transition to the Rec Track. If it does not, the URI publisher MUST have clear persistence policy (similar to W3C's, i.e., that the URI publisher will make every effort to service requests for the Namespace Document). 
make me believe that if the XKMS group has a persistence policy which states till we go recommendation, we can change the schema (hopefully not in reality), then we can update the exisiting schema document.
Note the below para:

This namespace name (URI) will only be used to refer to this version of this specification: different URIs will be used for any and all new versions of the specification [except as follows].

   [This namespace name may be reused in any update of the specification which is made for the purpose of clarification or bug fixes. These changes will be minor in that they do not (a) change the meaning or validity of existing documents written using the namespace, or (b) affect the operation of existing software written to process such documents.] 


But, the changes made will affect the operation of existing software.  

I would like to ask the W3C folks:  

Due to advances in schema writing for better error handling and parsing, use of QNames are being discouraged.  Hence, we have fixed this problem to do the right thing.  But, this has happened after CR and before PR.  Now, can we add some clarification to the document: http://www.w3.org/1999/10/nsuri regarding handling this kind of a situation or are we missing something here in terms of understanding.



Jose Kahan <jose.kahan@w3.org> wrote:


Does the schema have to be in that exact location for generating
the examples?

Can we fake this out somehow? 

I'll ask my team mates, but somehow, if the schema that's at that
namespace is the same one that's under the Cr /Schemas directory,
then they are both binded and you can't change one without updating the


pointing there, it means it's part of its schema. I won
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 09:21:42AM -0700, Shivaram Mysore wrote:
> Could you please check with the W3C czars on this. The worst case is that the PR draft will have a new name space - like 2004/10 . If this happens, then we will have to update the schema for URI references and regenerate examples. Could you please let us know soon so that I don't have to redo all of the examples insertion work (I have done some right now.)
> If others have any suggestions, please speak up.

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
Received on Friday, 8 October 2004 23:39:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:07:28 UTC