My reading of the standard suggested that it was optional, and
that its omission indicated that the text was in the "default" language, not
that the idea of default language is adequately described - is it default for
the node, or default for the user?
It used to be that only one entry could use any given xml:lang value
(including default), but that restriction has been eased in V3. As I see it, any
number of entries could be coded to the default, so optional seems a valid way
of indicating this.
I'd be in favour of drawing it into line with the treatment of xml:lang for
names - the two are analogous, as I see it.
Tony Rogers
-----Original Message----- From: Tom Bellwood
[mailto:bellwood@us.ibm.com] Sent: Thu 19/06/2003 9:12
To: Luc Clement Cc: uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [uddi-spec] Omission of use="optional" on the
description element
Yes, the xml:lang is optional everywhere else but for
descriptions. I agree we weren't consistent in its
treatment. I also seem to recall that it was intentionally left
as required here because descriptions are intended to be human readable
text and having the xml:lang can be important for such uses. We
should consider if this line of reasoning is important before making it
optional I think.
Other opinions? Someone with a different
recollection than mine here?
Thanks, Tom
Bellwood Phone: (512) 838-9957
(external); TL: 678/9957 (internal) Co-Chair, OASIS
UDDI Specification TC STSM - Emerging Technologies IBM
Corporation
"Luc Clement" <lclement@windows.microsoft.com> on
06/18/2003 01:39:47 PM
To:
<uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org> cc: Subject:
[uddi-spec] Omission of use="optional" on the
description
element
Tom / TC,
Please note that the http://uddi.org/schema/uddi_v3.xsd
schema omits use="optional" on the description element. I think this
is an omission and recommend we correct this definition as part of
CR-002. The current schema is declared
as:
<xsd:elementname="description"type="uddi:description"final="restriction"/>
<xsd:complexTypename="description"final="restriction">
<xsd:simpleContent>
<xsd:extensionbase="uddi:validationTypeString255">
<xsd:attributeref="xml:lang"/>
</xsd:extension>
</xsd:simpleContent>
</xsd:complexType>
... when I think we should have it declared
as:
<xsd:elementname="description"type="uddi:description"final="restriction"/>
<xsd:complexTypename="description"final="restriction">
<xsd:simpleContent>
<xsd:extensionbase="uddi:validationTypeString255">
<xsd:attributeref="xml:lang"use="optional"/>
</xsd:extension>
</xsd:simpleContent>
</xsd:complexType>
For your consideration.
Luc
Luc
Clément Microsoft
You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by
visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/uddi-spec/members/leave_workgroup.php
You
may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/uddi-spec/members/leave_workgroup.php
|