- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 19:35:46 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6009
--- Comment #5 from C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> 2009-04-14 19:35:45 ---
Responding to comment #4. John Arwe writes
- Your email starts out by appearing to argue that [schema error code] (to
choose a concrete example) contains (in principle) all such codes that
result
from a given schema validation episode, while the two [failed...]
properties in
question are defined differently. The proposed Notes seem to very much
echo
the [schema error code] proposition however (in principle complete, what a
given processor makes visible varies), so I'm not seeing any functional
difference.
Correct. I started by saying "they are different" -- as in the status quo I
think they are. And then I concluded that they ought not to be different,
and that the WG had relapsed into the error of treating infosets as if they
were APIs. So you are right that if the changes proposed are accepted, there
won't be any functional difference here. I recognize that the problem fixed
by the changes in the descriptions of the [failed ...] properties isn't
necessarily the problem you were intending to report.
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 14 April 2009 19:35:55 UTC