- From: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 20:31:08 -0700
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
These are just a few comments for your XML Schema Proposed Recommendation [1,2]. The terminology or conformance sections could explain that: The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. with RFC 2119 as a normative reference. If you don't want to use the RFC, then you could explain why not. The glossary in Structures should be cut. Perhaps it is automatically generated and that would explain why some terms are never defined or definitions refer to text not present in the glossary. For example: "base wildcard let the base wildcard be defined as" Sometimes too many hyperlinks make XML Schema hard to read. For example in Datatypes 2.4.1.1, there are eleven links for value space, when the first one would do. I didn't read closely but it looks like there are about three sets of constraining facets that a datatype could have. Why not name the most-used group as "common constraining facets" and list them only once? I think some Recommendation(s) do this. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/PR-xmlschema-1-20010330/ [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/PR-xmlschema-2-20010330/ Best wishes, -- Susan Lesch - mailto:lesch@w3.org tel:+1.858.483.4819 World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) - http://www.w3.org/
Received on Monday, 16 April 2001 23:31:23 UTC