- From: Eric J. Schwarzenbach <Eric.Schwarzenbach@wrycan.com>
- Date: 24 Mar 2004 07:26:02 -0700
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
My comments relate to http://www.w3c.org/TR/2004/PER-xmlschema-1-20040318/#rcase-MapAndSum I'd like to request that rcase-MapAndSum.2 be rephrased to make it more readable. There are a number of places in the these documents that suffer the same sort of human-parseability problems but this sentence is particularly egregious. The current wording is "The pair consisting of the product of the {min occurs} of R and the length of its {particles} and unbounded if {max occurs} is unbounded otherwise the product of the {max occurs} of R and the length of its {particles} is a valid restriction of B's occurrence range as defined by Occurrence Range OK (§3.9.6)." To make sense of it, one has to mentally reconstruct the boolean logic from a sentence which uses no commas or other delimiters to give any clue how the clauses should be nested (at least one conjunction is ambiguous, but I think one can deduce how it must go--one should not have to deduce, however, it should make its meaning clear). "The pair consisting of: (the product of the {min occurs} of R and the length of its {particles}) and ( (unbounded if {max occurs} is unbounded) otherwise (the product of the {max occurs}of R and the length of its {particles}) ) is a valid restriction of B's occurrence range as defined by Occurrence Range OK (§3.9.6)." Perhaps some such formatting like I use above would help--certainly natural language is not very "natural" for conveying nested boolean logic. Even having done this a few things are unclear: What is meant by "the pair". It's become apparent to me this must mean an ordered (min, max) pair. I may be mistaken, but I don't think this document defines "pair" to be assumed to have this meaning. In the phrase "unbounded if {max occurs} is unbounded", it does not specify {max occurs}of what the way it does the other occurrence specifiers. I believe "unbounded if {max occurs} of R is unbounded" is meant. The phrase "length of its {particles}" is unclear to me. The number of particles? The sum of each particles min value? The sum of each particles max value? The notes could also use some explication: *"Note: *This clause is in principle more restrictive than absolutely necessary, but in practice will cover all the likely cases, and is much easier to specify than the fully general version." It would be useful to know what cases it does not cover. *"Note: *This case allows the 'unfolding' of iterated disjunctions into sequences. It may be particularly useful when the disjunction is an implicit one arising from the use of substitution groups." What is an "iterated disjunction"? Or at least what does "disjunction" mean in this context? I only find the word used one other time in this document, in 2.2.3.1 Model Group. -- Eric Schwarzenbach Principal Content Architect Wrycan, Inc 617-684-0182
Received on Wednesday, 24 March 2004 09:29:27 UTC