- 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