[Bug 3889] 3.3.1 incorrect use of "respectively" (editorial)

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3889


cmsmcq@w3.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|resolved                    |




------- Comment #5 from cmsmcq@w3.org  2008-03-07 00:50 -------
Thank you for your response; apologies for the slow reply.  I wonder whether
the word 'explicit' was first introduced to distinguish the values
'extension' and 'restriction' from keywords like 'all'; if so, of course,
it's an unnecessary precaution since the sentence is talking about the
component level, not the XML source declaration level.  It stayed in the
revised sentence for no better reason than that I didn't think to take it out.

I agree that your suggested alternative is an improvement, although something
about the use of the singular troubles me and I lean toward

  When the values extension and restriction apear in the {substitution 
  group exclusions} property, they rule out element declarations having 
  types whose derivation from {type definition} involves any extension 
  steps or any restriction steps, respectively.

While this proposal has not received review by the other editors, I expect
that it, or something like it, will go to the WG along with other small
changes at some early date.  If you can live with this wording, please let
us know.  And thank you again.

Received on Friday, 7 March 2008 00:50:23 UTC