- From: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 16:55:36 -0800
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Here are a few suggestions for your XML Schema Structures [1] Candidate Recommendation, to use as you see fit. (It may be premature to point out typos.) Either use and give a reference to RFC 2119, or explain why not. For example, in 4.3.4, last list, "1.1 The corresponding attribute group definition, if any, must satisfy the conditions set out in Attribute Group Definition Constraints (§5.4)." can the RFC define "must" for you? Each table could have cellpadding="5". As you may be aware, these Glossary entries have incomplete definitions: actual type definition constitute a restriction context-dependent declarations emptiable explicit content explicit members fully conforming namespace URI overlap strictly assessed (two entries) valid valid extension (two entries) valid restriction (three entries) First person pronouns are evidently hard to translate (see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2000AprJun/0058.html). Eliminating "we" will cut a few bytes in this example (from 3. par. 5): [Definition:] when we refer to the initial value of some attribute information item, we mean by this the value of the [normalized value] property of that item. Similarly, when we refer to the initial value of an element information item, we mean the string composed of, in order, the [character code] of each character information item in the [children] of that element information item. becomes: [Definition:] the initial value of some attribute information item is the value of the [normalized value] property of that item. Similarly, the initial value of an element information item is the string composed of, in order, the [character code] of each character information item in the [children] of that element information item. I didn't list corrections for editors' notes or Appendix J. From here on, a section number is followed by a quote and then a suggestion. Abstract XML Namespace facility XML namespace facility Status of this document Groupconsiders Group considers Introduction, par. 2 XML schema can be lowercase unless referring to the title of this spec (XML Schema). 2.1 last par. and E assessment the work assessment the word assessment 2.4 par. 5 (§6.3.2). . (§6.3.2). 3 par. 3 present, optional present; optional taken to have absent taken to be absent 3. par. 8 linefeed line feed [see http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0000.pdf] 3. last par. idealisation idealization 4. list item 1 nothing in corresponding schema component nothing in the corresponding schema component [not sure there] 4.3.8 last example inter-alia <i>inter alia</i> 5.10 Constraint on Schemas: Particle Valid (Restriction) Is the table at the end of this clause nested one level too deep? 5.10 Constraint on Schemas: Particle Restriction OK (Elt:Elt -- NameAndTypeOK) 1.3 either B's declaration's {value constraint} absent 1.3 either B's declaration's {value constraint} is absent 5.11 Constraint on Schemas: Derivation Valid (Restriction, Complex) Is the clause after 1.5 meant to start at "1.5"? 5.12 Constraint on Schemas: Derivation Valid (Restriction, Simple) {facets}there {facets} there 6.2.1 par. 6 and 6.2.2 par. 10 and 6.2.3 par. 7 (that is {type definitions} {attribute declarations}, (that is {type definitions}, {attribute declarations}, 6.3.2 par. 3 Processors on the Web are free to undertaking assessment Processors on the Web are free to undertake assessment specialised specialized 6.3.2 2nd note NS URIs namespace URIs 6.3.2 par. above example stylesheet style sheet 7.2 note none-the-less nonetheless A. first annotation &lt;documentation> &lt;schema&gt; A. annotated &lt;schema&gt; <schema>: A. redefinable &lt;redefine> <redefine> A. complexTypeModel &lt;complexContent> &lt;restriction base="anyType"> ... &lt;/restriction> &lt;/complexContent></documentation> becomes: <complexContent> <restriction base="anyType"> ... </restriction> </complexContent></documentation> A. element toplevel top level B. XML Schema Requirements, H. DCD, H. DDML, H. SOX, and H. XML-Data W3C W3C Note B. XML, XML-Namespaces, and XPath W3C W3C Recommendation B. XML-Infoset XML Information Set (public WD), John Cowan, ed., W3C, XML Information Set, John Cowan and Richard Tobin, eds., W3C Working Draft, E. item type definition I didn't understand why this is another meaning of local type definition. E. Validition Rules Validation Rules G. Determinise Determinize, or maybe better, Determine I. Hewlett Packard Hewlett-Packard [twice] ArborText Arbortext [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-xmlschema-1-20001024/ Best wishes for your project, -- Susan Lesch - mailto:lesch@w3.org tel:+1.858.483.4819 World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) - http://www.w3.org/
Received on Thursday, 28 December 2000 19:56:31 UTC