- From: Misha Wolf <Misha.Wolf@reuters.com>
- Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 14:31:01 +0000
- To: asirv@webmethods.com
- Cc: w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Asir, Many thanks for your mail. The I18N WG's formal response is in: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-wg/2001Mar/0040 Regards, Misha On 04/03/2001 21:38:22 Asir S Vedamuthu wrote: > Dear i18N working group, > > 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 > (http://www.w3.org/2000/12/xmlschema-crcomments.html). > > You raised the point registered as issue CR-31, Should xml:lang be allowed > by default in all complex types?, > http://www.w3.org/2000/12/xmlschema-crcomments.html#universal-lang > > Resolution - the <redefine/> mechanism provides precisely the requested > functionality: > xml:lang can be added to types defined without it; Bidi markup can be added > to types with mixed content which did not provide for it as defined. > > Limitations - elements defined with simple types cannot be redefined to have > mixed content. > > Amelioration - The type library will define a 'text' type, and the Primer > will recommend its use. This has mixed content and allows any internal > markup. > > 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, > > Asir S Vedamuthu > XML Schema Working Group > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Reuters Ltd.
Received on Friday, 9 March 2001 09:46:26 UTC