[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [tag] Proposed Conf Clause rewording for the TA markup:
Agree with these updates - can you send out exactly the new complete clause, Dennis? -jacques -----Original Message----- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.org] Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 5:21 PM To: Jacques R. Durand; tag@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [tag] Proposed Conf Clause rewording for the TA markup: 1. I favor the proposed text. I did notice that the first sentence is peculiar in that it ascribes agency to implementations. How about Conforming instances of test assertions and conforming instances of test assertion sets are conforming implementations of this specification. It might work better if it follows the current second and third paragraphs. 2. I think referencing the Declared XML Namespace(s) link may end up being circular. I would refer to the "the schema accompanying this specification (section 3)." At the top of Section 3, ahead of the schema, I would put a paragraph that makes a normative citation to [taml-schema], which is provided a full citation in the normative references. I would then have the explanation that the text shown in the referenced schema is the authoritative one and the version in Section 3 is informative. I think this works better than referencing the front matter and in finding the schema indirectly through the Namespace Document. - Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Jacques R. Durand [mailto:JDurand@us.fujitsu.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 16:57 To: tag@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [tag] Proposed Conf Clause rewording for the TA markup: Based on today's discussion: Proposed Conf Clause rewording for the TA markup spec: NOTE: Make sure to send any comment on this before Thursday noon US PT time - the latest text to appear by this Thu noon PT is what Stephen will pick up for update early Friday morning (US time)...IF there is no objection raised on the mailing list in-between. [ ... ] PROPOSED TEXT: Implementations of this specification that may claim conformance according to this conformance clause are: (1) instances of test assertion, (2) instances of test assertion set. A conforming test assertion instance shall fulfill all mandatory normative statements in Sections 2.3 (test assertions) and 2.6 (reserved tag names) of this specification, and be valid according to the schema accompanying this specification with the namespace as defined under 'Declared XML Namespace(s)' in the heading area of this specification. A conforming test assertion set instance shall fulfill all mandatory normative statements in Sections 2.4 (test assertions set) 2.5 (test assertion references) and 2.6 (reserved tag names) of this specification, be valid according to the schema accompanying this specification with the namespace as defined under 'Declared XML Namespace(s)' in the heading area of this specification, and contain only conforming test assertions instances. This schema is copied in-line in section 3 but in the case of any discrepancies between the in-line copy and the schema accompanying this specification it is the separate schema which shall be used as the authoritative definition of the validating schema. -jacques
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]