Re: Starting an issues list?

[Stephen Green <stephen.green@documentengineeringservices.com>]

All I will do with these non-substantive changes
to the schema (separate and inline) is change
those places where we have

	<xs:complexType name="***Shared_type" mixed="true">
		<xs:simpleContent>
			<xs:extension base="***_type">
				<xs:attribute name="conflict" type="***ConflictCode_type"/>
			</xs:extension>
		</xs:simpleContent>
	</xs:complexType>


to

	<xs:complexType name="***Shared_type">
		<xs:simpleContent>
			<xs:extension base="***_type">
				<xs:attribute name="conflict" type="***ConflictCode_type"/>
			</xs:extension>
		</xs:simpleContent>
	</xs:complexType>

(where '***' is 'predicate', 'target', 'var', etc)

This change has little effect - it only improves the
clarity of the schema and the fidelity to the spec
representation. The 'mixed=true' is just ignored
by schema processors/parsers. Just as well to
remove it though I think.

Best regards

Steve
---
Stephen D Green




On 4 February 2010 16:06, Stephen Green
<stephen.green@documentengineeringservices.com> wrote:
>> I passed it
>> through the W3C online schema validator and found I got
>> a few warnings because there are places where simpleContent
>> is specified as having mixed content (mixed content when
>> there are no child elements, I think that means).
>
> OK, I found the causes of these 'warnings' and could correct
> them easily enough but that would warrant another draft of just
> the markup spec and the schema. I think it's worth this very
> minor change just to avoid misunderstanding of the important
> schema, even though it does not affect instances.
>
> I'll send out new drafts of the schema and the spec in a few
> hours time.
>
> Best regards
>
> Steve
> ---
> Stephen D Green
>
>
>
> On 4 February 2010 15:23, Stephen Green
> <stephen.green@documentengineeringservices.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear TAG TC,
>> I guess we will need an issues list. Any progress/thoughts
>> about having and using a Jira account?
>> I'm not sure how our TC comments will need to be separated
>> from external/public comments. I will have a few comments
>> of my own on how things might be improved after public review.
>> After this month I may have to submit comments via the
>> public comments list. Are we supposed to keep TC comments
>> separate and try to make such comments before the review
>> rather than during it?
>> My comment for now is that I think there would be special
>> benefit in having the schema itself reviewed. I passed it
>> through the W3C online schema validator and found I got
>> a few warnings because there are places where simpleContent
>> is specified as having mixed content (mixed content when
>> there are no child elements, I think that means). Some
>> review of this and any other related schema design features
>> might be warranted and might require minor changes to the
>> model as well as the schema (but these should not, I hope,
>> affect XML instances).
>> Best regards
>>
>> Steve
>> ---
>> Stephen D Green
>>
>