[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Unacceptable presentation of content models (ODF 1.2CD01r5)
Dear all, I have just taken a quick look at the new (rev5) draft of 1.2. The presentation of content models (text on a peach background) is still completely unacceptable, and this draft is consequently still mostly one enormous defect. For the spec say (as it does) "the element [x] is usable used with the following elements" makes no sense. And assuming you delete the spurious word 'usable' the statement is still way too loose and casual for a normative statement of an element's "upward" content model, since there will be constraints upon how that element's parent may come to contain the element in question as a child. The draft also states throughout that "The [x] element has the following child element(s)". But in *reality* your content models allow choice, sequencing, grouping, etc. But you have invented a prose schema language which loses all this vital information and lossily dumbs it down. This is a serious systematic fault in this draft and fiddling around with the wording is not going to cure it: you need to find an accurate and lossless way to represent the content models of elements you are normatively describing - and just such a thing already exists in RNG compact syntax. Likewise, it is unacceptable to state of an element "The [x] element has the following attributes." What you mean is that the [x] element is declared to have attributes with the following names. And then we (the readers) need to know which are optional, which are mandatory, and what their datatypes are. Again, RNG compact will concisely convey just this information. - Alex.