- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 19:52:08 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11961 Dave Peterson <davep@iit.edu> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |davep@iit.edu --- Comment #4 from Dave Peterson <davep@iit.edu> 2011-02-02 19:52:07 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > Fair enough. To me, "restrictive" and "constraining" suggest a restriction or > constraint on the set of valid instance documents, and in that sense the > whiteSpace facet is neither restrictive nor constraining. >From comment #2: > But regardless of whether, formally, the shift from > 'preserve' to 'replace' eliminates strings containing 
 from > the lexical space, it at the very least makes them a lot harder > to write in a document.) Note that the definition of the facet begins: " [Definition:] whiteSpace constrains the ˇvalue spaceˇ of types ˇderivedˇ from string such that...." Given that the stated purpose of whiteSpace is to constrain the value space, I think MSM's point of view must be the appropriate one. Please let us not revisit yet again at this late date the option of rewriting whole sections for clarity. -- 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 Wednesday, 2 February 2011 19:52:10 UTC