[Bug 16080] Why does XSD 1.1 part 1 cite XSD 1.0 2E normatively?

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16080

--- Comment #1 from C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> 2012-02-22 16:33:43 UTC ---
Further information:  The citation for XML Schema 2nd Edition appears to be an
orphan:  there are no references to it anywhere in the spec.

Some other references in the list of normative references should probably be
reviewed.

Functions and Operators is referred to in connection with the evaluation of
XPath expressions; the citation should probably say that only the specific
portions referred to in F&O are normative parts of XSD 1.1, not the entirety of
F&O.

XDM is referred to in the same contexts.  Must XSD 1.1 implementations be full
conforming implementations of XDM?  If not, the citation should say what parts
of the XDM are normative parts of XSD 1.1.

XPath 2.0 also needs a note saying that only the portions of XPath 2.0
mentioned as obligatory in XSD 1.1 need to be implemented by XSD 1.1
implementations, not all of XPath 2.0.  

XSLT 2.0 is referred to several times, always to the effect that
implementations are not required to use the XSLT 2.0 transformations given in
the appendix but may perform the same changes in other ways.  I think the
reference should probably be moved to the non-normative list.

In Datatypes, the citations for XPath 2.0 and F&O should, I think, say
explicitly that only the parts mentioned as obligatory for XSD 1.1 processors
are normative parts of XSD 1.1 Part 2.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://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, 22 February 2012 16:33:50 UTC