- From: Arnold, Curt <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 17:01:17 -0600
- To: "'www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org'" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Kohsuke Kawaguchi posted the following on xml-dev, since I think some of his points are valid and wanted to add my 2 cents, I've cross posted his original message. -----Original Message----- From: Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI [mailto:k-kawa@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 1:39 PM To: Rick Jelliffe Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org; Simon St.Laurent Subject: XML Schema Datatype: unanswered questions. > last moment. Numbers and time/dates both have been very difficult to get > right (indeed, we basically gave up on producing an acceptable type > heirarchy for dates and times for XML Schemas 1.0). It seems to me that WG gave up producing acceptable types (not only hierarchy but types themselves) for dates and times. The followings are my post to www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org about date/time related types. I think those two are fairly important: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0366.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0365.html But nobody gave an answer. The following three are very simple mistakes. A WG member promised me a correction. But the truth is the same errors still remain in PR spec. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0270.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0271.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0272.html Those two are also related to date/time types. And again, no answer has given. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0368.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0367.html Actually, I've posted more than 20 comments to www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org but more than half are unanswered at all. It sure is a good way to discourage people from sending comments. I'm not familiar with W3C process, but is WG allowed to ignore public reviews? I understand that the WG is very busy and obviously it is impossible to answer *all* of the comments, but how can they ignore comments like first two ? The spec says > Technical and editorial comments should be sent to the publicly > archived www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org mailing list. But there is no description about how comments are treated. regards, ---------------------- K.Kawaguchi E-Mail: k-kawa@bigfoot.com
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2001 19:04:03 UTC