Should we postpone the next teleconference?

["G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>]

In light of these excellent questions, I'm unsure about keeping the 
tentative January 22 teleconference.

I'd like to get the opinions of others for these answers.  Please 
post them to the list as soon as possible.  I'll write my own as 
well.  If there are big changes then I won't be ready with another 
draft before the 22nd.  If we decide there aren't big changes, then I 
will be ready and we can talk about the next draft.

Please share your thoughts.

. . . . . . . . . . . Ken

At 2008-01-08 09:42 +0000, Paul Spencer wrote:

>Sorry it has taken me a while to catch up, but I have now read this draft.
>
>As a general point, why XPath 1.0, not 2.0?
>
>I seem to remember this one being discussed, but I have forgotten the
>reason. Since the CVA spec applies solely to genericode validation, why is
>the word "genericode" not included in the title?
>
>In the introduction, there is discussion of three levels of validation:
>structure, value, co-constraints. But genericode only covers a fraction of
>value constraints. For example, it does not cover a constraint that a value
>must be between 100 and 299. This seems to be ignored in the discussion.
>
>I followed the link to Crane Softwrights resources at the bottom of page 7,
>but did not find anything relevant initially. The link to the correct page
>on the site needs to mention genericode and CVA.
>
>I think the use of mixed model has been discussed. I hate it in this type of
>document. I would only allow mixed model in external namespaces (such as
>XHTML). It is easier to read and easier to process without it.
>
>CVA uses a relational model with separate ValueList and Contexts. I can see
>that this saves text in rare cases where a masqueraded list has multiple
>references, but otherwise it just complicates things. Is it necessary? I
>would prefer to see the two combined into something like:
>         <Association item="@item-a" values="enumeration2.gs/>
>
>I understand the use of the context and xpath attributes, but do we need
>both? Would it be less confusing if we dropped the context attribute?
>
>I also wonder if it will be confusing to some to have a Context element and
>a context attribute.
>
>I kept looking at the example on page 10 looking for an example of the use
>of the xpath attribute. There isn't one.
>
>The penultimate para of page 11 ends by mentioning two mutually-exclusive
>attributes. It would be useful to name them here.
>
>A personal thing - I dislike using angle brackets round element names.
>"<Context>" is not an element - it is a start tag. Similarly "item=" is
>neither an attribute, nor an attribute name. As I say, this is personal
>preference. I don't think  OASIS has a guideline on this.
>
>Does the xpath attribute always specify a single information item? This is
>the implication of the last para of page 11.
>
>Last para of page 12. Should this be non-normative? Perhaps a normative
>statement is needed as well to describe how multiple references to the same
>information item are handled.
>
>The note on page 13. I was not sure what this added.
>
>p15. Mixed content again. This could easily be removed.
>
>Appendix A. Is this needed?
>
>That's it. Some minor comments, some rather more major. I look forward to
>some responses.
>
>Regards
>
>Paul Spencer
>Director
>Boynings Consulting Ltd
>http://boynings.co.uk
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
>at:
>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php


--
Comprehensive in-depth XSLT2/XSL-FO1.1 classes: Austin TX,Jan-2008
World-wide corporate, govt. & user group XML, XSL and UBL training
RSS feeds:     publicly-available developer resources and training
G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0    +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
Male Cancer Awareness Nov'07  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc
Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal