- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 17:47:40 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11228 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords|needsReview |decided Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #4 from C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> 2011-01-28 17:47:39 UTC --- On 28 January 2011 the WG discussed the proposal given in comment 2 and amended in comment 3. We agreed on several further amendments: - The opening should read "Particles in the schema typically ..." not "Particles typically ..." - Delete the words "several different kinds of". - Accept the optional addition mentioned in comment 2. - In the addition, replace the second sentence with "For example, particles may be synthesized in complex type extension." - In the addition, replace "There are situations where particles" with "Sometimes particles". So the final change is to replace the paragraph beginning "Particles correspond ..." with Particles in the schema typically correspond to element information items that can bear minOccurs and maxOccurs attributes in the schema document: - Local <element>, see XML Representation of Element Declaration Schema Components (§3.3.2) - Model groups <all>, <sequence>, and <choice>, see XML Representation of Model Group Schema Components (§3.8.2) - Group references <group>, see XML Representation of Model Group Definition Schema Components (§3.7.2) - Wildcard <any>, see XML Representation of Wildcard Schema Components (§3.10.2) Sometimes particles do not correspond to any of these elements. For example, particles may be synthesized in complex type extension. The WG adopted the proposal as amended. I'm marking this issue as decided; the next step is to integrate it into the status-quo documents maintained by the working group. -- 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 Friday, 28 January 2011 17:47:42 UTC