- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 10 Jan 2003 16:01:42 +0000
- To: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Cc: "Jeff Rafter" <jeffrafter@defined.net>, xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> writes:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> "The following constraints define relations appealed to elsewhere in
> this specification."
>
> In other words, the only SCC that applies to all particles is the
> Particle Correct SCC. The other SCCs in that section just act as
> definitions that are used elsewhere in the spec. So, for example, when
> a constraint wants to say "if the particle is emptiable then..." then
> it can refer to the common definition of what it means for a particle
> to be emptiable by pointing to the Particle Emptiable SCC.
Jeni's right. It would be clearer if the opening para said "All
particles must satisfy the following constraint." instead of
"constraints", I agree. That's a boilerplate sentence originally used
in all 3.?.6 sections.
ht
--
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
W3C Fellow 1999--2002, part-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Friday, 10 January 2003 11:01:41 UTC