Re: [Bug 12184] Circularity in xs:override

On Mar 10, 2011, at 2:57 PM, Henry S. Thompson wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> C. M. Sperberg-McQueen writes:
> 
>> On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:38 AM, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
>> 
>>> ...
>> 
> 
>> If the nodes we are processing of schema documents, and if schema
>> documents are uniquely identified by their URIs, then it would seem
>> that the proposition 'n.uri = m.uri' implies that n = m.
> 
> Yes, for sure -- it's just I wanted to be clear that I wasn't
> depending on any _other_ approach to determining schema doc. identity.
> 
>> It rather looks as if the nodes of G cannnot be schema documents
>> identified by URIs, but must be tuples of the form (U,M) where U is a
>> URI and M is a set of markers.  
> 
> I thought I had made that clear --- yes, that's the intention.

In that case, I think it might help to reword the bit that says

    The nodes of the graph (which we'll call G) are schema documents, 
    identified by their base URIs, which we take to be the URIs of the 
    schema documents as retrieved after all redirection has occurred.

...
> 
>> But perhaps the most important is: what bug are you trying to resolve?
>> Your mail suggests there is an open issue that requires us to revisit,
>> revise, or replace the description of the override transform given in
>> appendix F.2; which issue is that?
> 
> 12184 and 11354. I know 12184 is officially CLOSED, but I'm not
> convinced the proposed fix is either complete or correct.
> 

Then I guess that at some point you will make a proposal to the
WG that 12184 be re-opened, so we can discuss whether we
will or won't reopen it.

-- 
****************************************************************
* C. M. Sperberg-McQueen, Black Mesa Technologies LLC
* http://www.blackmesatech.com 
* http://cmsmcq.com/mib                 
* http://balisage.net
****************************************************************

Received on Friday, 11 March 2011 14:52:10 UTC