Re: Resolution to CR-36

I am satisfied with the decision taken by the WG - Asir

On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Alex Milowski wrote:

> Dear Asir Vedamuthu,
> The W3C XML Schema Working Group has spent the last several weeks
> working through the comments received from the public on the
> Candidate Recommendation (CR) of the XML Schema specification. We
> thank you for the comments you made on our specification during
> our CR comment period, and want to make sure you know that all
> comments received during the CR comment period have been recorded
> in our CR issues list (
> You raised the point registered as issue CR-36:
> Title: repeated-facets: Clarify meaning and processing of repeated facets?
> Description:
> Should Datatypes be modified to specify explicitly whether multiple 
> occurrences of facets (length, minLength, maxLength, whiteSpace, 
> maxInclusive, minInclusive, maxExclusive, minExclusive, precision, scale, 
> encoding, duration, and period) should be an error or not? If it is not an 
> error, which facet specification in the schema document should be followed?
>  * the first one?
>  * the last one?
>  * the most restrictive?
>  * the least restrictive one?
>  * some other rule?
> Proposed Resolution:
> Chairs propose (1) to clarify that repeated facets are an error if not 
> authorized in the spec, and (2) to ensure that facets occurring at multiple 
> points in a derivation (e.g. patterns) can be combined successfully in a 
> single component at the abstract level (need ANDing of patterns).
> Actual Resolution:
> At its January 2001 meeting in London, the WG voted to open this as an 
> outstanding issue, and (after brief discussion) to resolve it as proposed 
> by the chairs.
> It would be helpful to us to know whether you are satisfied with the
> decision taken by the WG on this issue, or wish your dissent from the
> WG's decision to be recorded for consideration by the Director of
> the W3C.
> Regards,
> Alex Milowski
> XML Schema Working Group

Received on Thursday, 8 March 2001 09:11:16 UTC