IRC log of databinding on 2007-02-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

08:26:14 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #databinding
08:26:14 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-irc
08:26:15 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
08:26:16 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #databinding
08:26:17 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be DBWG
08:26:18 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
08:26:18 [trackbot]
Meeting: Databinding WG Teleconference
08:26:18 [trackbot]
Date: 13 February 2007
08:26:53 [pauld]
scribe: pauld
08:26:58 [pauld]
chair: pauld
08:27:25 [pauld]
Topic: Administrivia
08:27:48 [gcowe]
gcowe has joined #databinding
08:27:51 [pauld]
pauld has left #databinding
08:29:22 [pauld]
pauld has joined #databinding
09:21:59 [pauld]
gcowe: would like to change the Siebel comment in the minutes
09:22:02 [pauld]
pauld: OK!
09:22:15 [pauld]
Topic: Test Suite
09:22:26 [pauld]
pauld: we need to publish our reports
09:22:36 [pauld]
plan to publish detected patterns
09:22:52 [pauld]
yves: been working with XMLUnit
09:23:01 [pauld]
discussion of Yves report
09:23:38 [pauld]
pauld: need a rollup, need to fix log namespace for nonamespace schemas, but looks good!
09:24:25 [pauld]
pauld: Yves will work on the rollup, pauld will work on detecting patterns in the wild jon and george to battle with toolkits
09:24:46 [pauld]
pauld: OK today we answer comments, rest of the meeting we work on the reports
09:24:49 [pauld]
BREAK
10:11:12 [JonC]
JonC has joined #databinding
10:16:19 [pauld]
Topic: c-erh-1 : typo "casue"
10:16:32 [pauld]
Jonc: actually a type in "Advanced"
10:16:40 [pauld]
pauld: i seem to have fixed it
10:16:59 [pauld]
pauld: how do I work EXIT? Shoot me. Shoot me now!
10:17:07 [pauld]
pauld: accepted!
10:17:33 [pauld]
Topic: lc-i18n-1 : BOM link to Unicode FAQ
10:19:01 [pauld]
pauld: do we have any tests for BOM?
10:19:20 [pauld]
ACTION: pdowney to write BOM examples for the testsuite
10:19:21 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-104 - Write BOM examples for the testsuite [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].
10:19:53 [pauld]
pauld: they want us to link to http://www.unicode.org/unicode/faq/utf_bom.html#BOM
10:20:08 [pauld]
paul: informative reference?
10:20:24 [pauld]
pauld: any objections?
10:20:58 [pauld]
ACTION: pdowney to add informative reference for BOM link to Unicode FAQ
10:20:58 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-105 - Add informative reference for BOM link to Unicode FAQ [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].
10:21:19 [pauld]
Topic: lc-i18n-2 : Working with Time Zones
10:21:59 [pauld]
pauld: want to link to http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-timezone-20051013/
10:23:34 [pauld]
pauld: looks like goodness
10:23:58 [pauld]
ACTION: pdowney to add reference to http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-timezone-20051013/
10:23:59 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-106 - Add reference to http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-timezone-20051013/ [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].
10:24:23 [pauld]
Topic: c-i18n-3: language type to reference BCP47
10:27:30 [pauld]
reference comes from XML Schema, our spec is all boilerplate here
10:28:33 [pauld]
ACTION: pdowney to add reference to BCP47
10:28:34 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-107 - Add reference to BCP47 [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].
10:29:14 [pauld]
Topic: lc-drkm-1: XPath 2.0 and node-set
10:29:26 [pauld]
pauld: used node-set but that's XPath 1.0
10:30:41 [pauld]
pauld: Priscilla raised the same comment, and I trust both to be correct, however node-set is in common usage. Sequence implies order, but we don't care about order
10:31:16 [pauld]
pauld: let's park this until Priscilla joins us
10:31:30 [pauld]
Topic: lc-psd-1: WS-I Basic Profile compliant schema import
10:33:05 [pauld]
pauld: this pattern should really be Basic, is this a significant change?
10:33:15 [pauld]
gcowe: I use this pattern quite a bit
10:33:28 [pauld]
pauld: only way you can import a schema and be BP compliant
10:33:49 [pauld]
pauld: easy to write a constrained XPath for this commonly used pattern
10:34:00 [pauld]
any objections to adding this to Basic?
10:34:30 [pauld]
ACTION: pauld to add a Basic Pattern for BP compliant schema import
10:34:30 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - pauld
10:35:20 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: close lc-psd-1 as accepted
10:35:59 [pauld]
Topic: c-jmarsh-1: XPath Expressions Too Complex?
10:36:13 [pauld]
pauld: too many notes, your royal highness ;-)
10:36:55 [pauld]
pauld: Jonathan thinks XPath is complex, wonder how he'll like moving to the terminology as well
10:37:19 [pauld]
pauld: I agree, in cases such as this we can simplify the expressions
10:38:33 [pauld]
pauld: @targetNamespace is not the same as .[@targetNamespace]/ (., @targetNamespace) since that returns two nodes
10:39:06 [pauld]
jonc: is he asking us not to use this style where not needed?
10:39:20 [pauld]
pauld: there are other XPaths which can be simplified
10:40:30 [pauld]
jonc: will review the XPaths to simplify
10:40:56 [pauld]
pauld: I quite like them all being the same style, would some introduction text help?
10:43:41 [pauld]
pauld: but for this pattern, it is necessary to match xs:schema and targetNamesapce because we don't allow xs:schema without a targetNamespace!
10:44:29 [pauld]
ACTION: jcalladi to review XPaths for unnecessary nodes being matched
10:44:29 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-108 - Review XPaths for unnecessary nodes being matched [on Jonathan Calladine - due 2007-02-20].
10:45:20 [pauld]
pauld: will reject this comment for @targetNamespace, but accept the thrust which is to simplify the patterns where possible
10:45:45 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: close c-jmarsh-1 as rejected
10:46:03 [pauld]
Topic: lc-jmarsh-2: Schema Version Attribute
10:46:19 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #databinding
10:46:22 [pauld]
pauld: how does it help with databinding?
10:46:32 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #databinding
10:47:18 [pauld]
jonc: assumption is we're encouraging it, we're just saying it's allowed
10:47:37 [pauld]
pauld: we allowed it because it's mostly harmless, tools can ignore it
10:47:59 [pauld]
pauld: can we flag patterns as being noise
10:48:23 [pauld]
gcowe: would we leave it out or move it to Advanced?
10:48:45 [pauld]
jonc: but it's not Advanced under our criteria of doesn't fail with tools
10:49:12 [JonC]
first do no harm....
10:49:18 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: close lc-jmarsh-2 as rejected, subject to tools working with the pattern
10:49:46 [pauld]
Topic: lc-jmarsh-3: Duplicate Listing
10:51:22 [pauld]
pauld: thinks the example is demonstrating two uses of annotation, should be split
10:52:19 [pauld]
pauld: do we want an ElementDocumentationElement and a SchemaDocumentationElement, etc, etc?
10:53:00 [pauld]
pauld: is there value in such fine-grained patterns?
10:53:18 [pauld]
gcowe: it's mostly ignored by tools anyway
10:54:26 [pauld]
pauld: we could go the other way and make the example have ComplexType/xs:annotation SimpleType/xs:annotation, etc to be clear, but then that would be difficult if we moved SimpleType to Advanced at some point
10:54:44 [pauld]
jonc: one pattern seems good enough
10:55:11 [pauld]
pauld: it's confusing, maybe we need another test case, but simplify the example in the spec
10:56:14 [pauld]
pauld: we need to test it before splitting the pattern
10:56:16 [pauld]
ACTION: gcowe: to split DocumentationElement example into more than one example / testcase
10:56:16 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - gcowe:
10:57:03 [Yves]
!rehash
10:58:33 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: accept lc-jmarsh-3
10:59:01 [pauld]
Topic: lc-jmarsh-4: Value of @mixed="false" etc
11:05:12 [JonC]
I think we recognise the feeling here that it is the lack of problematic patterns that is of interest
11:05:44 [JonC]
but it is not what the basic patterns document is really about
11:05:52 [pauld]
pauld: the pattern is Basic if tools swallow it without barfing
11:07:21 [pauld]
pauld: is the @mixed!='true' really saying //@mixed!='true'
11:08:19 [pauld]
Jonc: it's a slippery slope
11:08:49 [pauld]
pauld: seen schemas which generate this and other defaults explicitly and interoperate
11:09:19 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: lc-jmarsh-4 rejected
11:09:43 [pauld]
pauld: it's like ROOM 101
11:10:13 [pauld]
Topic: lc-jmarsh-5: Grouping of R2800 and R2112
11:12:43 [pauld]
pauld: puzzled - R2112 is something we allow, but BP doesn't whereas R2800 is vice-versa
11:12:50 [pauld]
pauld: let
11:13:23 [pauld]
s/let/let's reject it and get Jonathan to explain why, he is a BP expert after all!/
11:13:54 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: lc-jmarsh-5 rejected
11:14:57 [pauld]
Topic: lc-Microsoft-1: Support for Attributes
11:18:19 [pauld]
jonc: we're about what works with toolkits now, not what might be removed in the future
11:19:09 [pauld]
gcowe: we find attributes useful, certainly we don't want to move away from them
11:19:23 [JonC]
also think that we have never been in the business of setting the bar so very low
11:19:48 [pauld]
pauld: I'd be sympathetic if there was a "state of the art" toolkit which didn't handle them.
11:20:29 [pauld]
pauld: under our way of working, attributes are fine, but I think it's an interesting comment, and a warning things may be more constrained
11:21:08 [pauld]
pauld: I'd like to be able to round-trip to JSON without an infoset, and such a constraint would help greatly
11:21:35 [JonC]
we have identified issues with attributes and marked as advanced this is the way forward not removing support for them entirely
11:21:52 [pauld]
pauld: our testing will help here
11:22:43 [pauld]
pauld: nothing to stop Microsoft publishing their own "Very Basic" document using our patterns, or a few of them, anyway
11:23:20 [pauld]
pauld: actually that's something we'd encourage, vendors being more explicit about which patterns are or are not supported
11:23:40 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: lc-Microsoft-1 rejected
11:24:07 [pauld]
Topic: lc-Microsoft-2: Element References
11:24:43 [pauld]
pauld: worries me because I use it to wrap example elements into the test suite WSDL
11:24:53 [pauld]
jonc: all our schemas contain them
11:25:35 [pauld]
pauld: I think it's a valid constraint though, and there are no natural equivalent in most modern programming languages (C pointers anyone?)
11:25:55 [pauld]
pauld: well, not to a type, that is
11:26:01 [JonC]
but what toolkit fails with them?
11:26:42 [pauld]
pauld: exactly, that's our criteria
11:28:14 [pauld]
discussion of mapping global elements to programming languages
11:29:09 [pauld]
if a sequence contains elements from a different namespace, what's the mapping to a C£/Java class?
11:29:23 [pauld]
pauld: .NET annotations cope with this, no?
11:30:00 [pauld]
pauld: do we need a test case for crossing namespaces, or tighten the pattern to just within the same namespace?
11:30:38 [pauld]
pauld: nervous of defining such patterns as they need a component model to span schemas
11:31:43 [pauld]
gcowe: do we need an example of spanning multiple namespaces?
11:33:26 [pauld]
pauld: propose we split this pattern to "within the same schema document" and "across schemas" not namespaces, and then have an example to test this
11:33:50 [pauld]
pauld: OK, we'll keep this open, subject to testing
11:34:14 [pauld]
ACTION: pdowney to split ElementReference into two patterns
11:34:14 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-110 - Split ElementReference into two patterns [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].
11:34:26 [pauld]
s/£/#/
11:35:26 [pauld]
Topic: lc-Microsoft-3: Nested Sequences and sequences other than minOccurs=maxOccurs=1
11:38:23 [pauld]
pauld: I think they're being helpful, are we being too fine-grained here?
11:38:40 [pauld]
s/being too/too/
11:39:21 [pauld]
gcowe: it's complexity that's needed
11:41:30 [pauld]
jonc: is maxOccurs=1 a typeo
11:41:52 [pauld]
gcowe: think this is pushing wrapped for repeated elements
11:42:22 [pauld]
.. modelling tools don't always generate wrapped arrays
11:42:39 [pauld]
jonc: we may end up making bare arrays advanced subject to testing
11:42:56 [pauld]
pauld: let's hold off on this subject to testing
11:43:52 [pauld]
Topic: lc-Microsoft-4: schemaLocation
11:44:15 [pauld]
pauld: big +1 to that
11:44:48 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: lc-Microsoft-4 accepted
11:45:12 [pauld]
ACTION: pdowney to add advice that schemaLocation is a hint
11:45:12 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-111 - Add advice that schemaLocation is a hint [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].
11:45:53 [pauld]
Topic: lc-Microsoft-5: maxOccurs=finite
11:46:21 [pauld]
pauld: I agree with the comment!
11:46:36 [pauld]
gcowe: we need this for our schemas
11:47:04 [pauld]
jonc: our criteria is if tools don't reject it it's basic
11:47:12 [pauld]
pauld: zero, one, many
11:47:46 [pauld]
pauld: few tools do validation, or build an array[3] anymore, well 'C' might
11:48:26 [pauld]
pauld: hold this open subject to testing
11:49:28 [pauld]
Topic: lc-Microsoft-6: Null enumerations
11:50:38 [pauld]
this came from an X.694 inspired contribution
11:51:02 [pauld]
pauld: it's valid schema, comment asks if it's useful
11:51:49 [pauld]
do we have to justify use of patterns in the spec?
11:52:34 [pauld]
.. it is listed as a "
11:52:47 [pauld]
.. way of saying a value is Null
11:52:57 [pauld]
.. always Null in X.694
11:53:19 [pauld]
pauld: it is fairly Zen though, sound of no data passing
11:53:55 [pauld]
pauld: what does it mean to accept this comment
11:54:05 [pauld]
s/ent/ent?/
11:55:34 [pauld]
pauld: will write back and explain the origin, will remain in the spec subject to testing, but i suspect one tool at least doesn't support it, so it's toast
11:55:53 [JonC]
advanced toast anyway
11:56:11 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: lc-Microsoft-6 accpeted
11:56:22 [pauld]
s/accpeted/accepted/
11:56:26 [pauld]
LUNCH!
11:56:37 [pauld]
RRSAgent, generate minutes
11:56:37 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html pauld
11:56:49 [pauld]
RRSAgent, make logs public
13:04:11 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #databinding
13:36:07 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #databinding
13:38:41 [pauld]
Topic: lc-Microsoft-7: Mixing elements maxOccurs=1 and maxOccurs>1 ...
13:38:51 [pauld]
Jonc: bare arrays
13:38:52 [pauld]
pauld:
13:39:21 [pauld]
s/pauld:/pauld: "Bare arrays do not support the distinction between null arrays and empty arrays"
13:39:35 [pauld]
.. seems like a valid comment from a code-first POV
13:39:52 [pauld]
.. you can't send a null array with a bare array
13:40:33 [pauld]
pauld: we've decided not to offer advice on chosing a pattern, is this a special case?
13:41:16 [JonC]
also valid comment from a efficiency/productivity POV e.g. XSLT
13:41:37 [pauld]
pauld: i don't understand the efficiency comment
13:41:54 [pauld]
jonc: tools don't bail on this
13:42:07 [pauld]
pauld: sounds like a "Design Consideration"
13:43:31 [pauld]
pauld: maybe the XSLT comment referds to A* B* C* A*
13:44:34 [pauld]
pauld: seems like I might elect not to use this pattern, but does that mean that schemas which exhibit this pattern are rejected by tools?
13:45:16 [pauld]
pauld: how strongly do people feel about this? Do we need more information, how widely used is the pattern?
13:45:40 [pauld]
gcowe: we use it
13:45:47 [JonC]
sounds more like best practice recommendation ???
13:45:51 [pauld]
pauld: and you're a member of the WG!
13:48:45 [pauld]
pauld: it's in our spec, to lose it we have to demonstrate lack of support. To accept the comment we have to change the way we work. I might not like this pattern but if it works with tools and is used in Schemas in the wild, then it's basic.
13:49:46 [pauld]
jonc: we're going to continue using wrapped as our default, but don't see any reason to remove as yet
13:50:15 [pauld]
pauld: let's keep it open, subject to testing
13:50:52 [pauld]
Topic: c-Microsoft-8: Mixing elements maxOccurs=1 and maxOccurs>1 in the same inheritance chain
13:51:02 [pauld]
s/c-Mi/lc-Mi/
13:51:57 [pauld]
pauld: a challenge to write an XPath for this across multiple schema documents, but is the comment valid?
13:52:38 [pauld]
pauld: in some ways depends upon lc-Microsoft-7
13:52:53 [pauld]
pauld: do we have a test case?
13:53:26 [pauld]
ACTION: gcowe to write a test case for lc-Microsoft-7
13:53:27 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-112 - Write a test case for lc-Microsoft-7 [on George Cowe - due 2007-02-20].
13:54:51 [pauld]
gcowe: action is for lc-Microsoft-8, no?
13:54:57 [pauld]
pauld: d'oh!
13:56:08 [pauld]
Topic: Report Bashing
13:56:25 [pauld]
gcowe: patterns detection stylesheet,
13:58:14 [pauld]
gcowe: can we reference a stylesheet for the output?
13:58:27 [pauld]
pauld: prefer to do that server side
13:59:00 [pauld]
ACTION: ylafon to make patteerns detection service run stylesheet
13:59:01 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-113 - Make patteerns detection service run stylesheet [on Yves Lafon - due 2007-02-20].
13:59:18 [pauld]
s/Report Bashing/Pattern Detection Service/
13:59:42 [pauld]
gcowe: I have a version which works with file upload and URI
14:00:25 [pauld]
yves: can we provide the source / war file for people wanting to run this for themselves
14:00:30 [pauld]
gcoew: that's fine
14:00:41 [pauld]
s/gcoew/gcowe/
14:01:13 [pauld]
pauld: what about the "freshness" of the patterns.xml file used, where does it come from?
14:01:54 [pauld]
ylafon: service runs from a copy of the stylesheet
14:02:08 [pauld]
pauld: how do we get changes propogated?
14:03:35 [pauld]
pauld: can we put the source code war file rollup into the WG CVS?
14:04:29 [pauld]
gcowe: we could make the service pickup the live version, and make that configurable
14:05:11 [pauld]
ACTION: gcowe to make the detection service pick up the live stylesheet, configurably
14:05:11 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-114 - Make the detection service pick up the live stylesheet, configurably [on George Cowe - due 2007-02-20].
14:06:01 [pauld]
ACTION: gcowe to put patterns detection source code into WG CVS
14:06:01 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-115 - Put patterns detection source code into WG CVS [on George Cowe - due 2007-02-20].
14:06:28 [pauld]
pauld: when do we go live / announce the service?
14:07:41 [pauld]
yves: not tied to publication of our documents
14:08:14 [pauld]
pauld: plan to announce it with publication of our reports
14:09:57 [pauld]
pauld: do we conisder bundling WS-I BP in our service?
14:10:25 [pauld]
s/conisder/consider/
14:10:40 [pauld]
TBD
14:11:17 [pauld]
Topic: Testing Workshop
14:11:37 [pauld]
WG looks at Axis and the testsuite
14:57:30 [pwalmsley]
pwalmsley has joined #databinding
15:00:29 [pauld]
zakim, this will be schema
15:00:29 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, pauld
15:01:13 [pauld]
zakim, teleconferences?
15:01:15 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, pauld.
15:01:33 [pauld]
trackbot, start telcon
15:01:35 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
15:01:37 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be DBWG
15:01:38 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WS_DBWG()10:00AM scheduled to start now
15:01:38 [trackbot]
Meeting: Databinding WG Teleconference
15:01:38 [trackbot]
Date: 13 February 2007
15:02:18 [pauld]
zakim, code?
15:02:21 [Zakim]
the conference code is 3294 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), pauld
15:03:02 [Zakim]
WS_DBWG()10:00AM has now started
15:03:09 [Zakim]
+[Sophia]
15:03:23 [pauld]
Meeting: Databinding F2F (Tuesday)
15:03:31 [Zakim]
+ +1.231.218.aaaa
15:03:59 [pauld]
zakim, aaaa is pwalmsley
15:03:59 [Zakim]
+pwalmsley; got it
15:04:15 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-1: Document or Element Node
15:04:57 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: lc-pwalmsley-1 accpeted
15:05:14 [pauld]
s/accpe/accep/
15:05:38 [pauld]
pwalmsley: ok with me!
15:05:52 [pauld]
ACTION: pdowney to edit lc-pwalmsley-1
15:05:53 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-117 - Edit lc-pwalmsley-1 [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].
15:06:23 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-2: "node-set" should be "sequence"
15:07:23 [pauld]
pwalmsley: term node-set isn't used in XPath, is order significant
15:07:28 [pauld]
pauld: no
15:07:57 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: lc-pwalmsley-2 accepted
15:08:12 [pauld]
ACTION: pdowney to edit lc-pwalmsley-2
15:08:12 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-118 - Edit lc-pwalmsley-2 [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].
15:08:39 [pauld]
pauld: also closes lc-drkm-1: XPath 2.0 and node-set ?
15:09:08 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-3: QualifiedLocalElements
15:09:22 [pauld]
pwalmsley: example doesn't have any elements
15:11:10 [pauld]
http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-patterns/#pattern-QualifiedLocalElements
15:11:19 [pauld]
name of the pattern is misleading?
15:11:40 [pauld]
pwalmsley: don't feel strongly, we can just leave it
15:12:37 [pauld]
pauld: we have an assertion: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-patterns/#assert-QualifiedLocalElements-summary
15:13:29 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: lc-pwalmsley-3 rejected
15:13:38 [pauld]
pwalmsley: OK with this
15:14:30 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-5: ElementFinal
15:15:22 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-5
15:15:32 [pauld]
pwalmsley: OK with this
15:16:01 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-6: ImportTypesNamespace
15:17:50 [pauld]
pwalmsley: might be invalid use of schema
15:19:19 [pauld]
pauld: trying to capture a common pattern used within WSDL
15:20:43 [pauld]
pauld: maybe we could add another clause to capture self reference in (@namespace = ../xs:schema/@targetNamespace)]
15:20:56 [pauld]
pwalmsley: that would be an invalid schema
15:21:20 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: rejected lc-pwalmsley-6
15:21:28 [pauld]
pwalmsley: I'm OK with that
15:22:32 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-7: GlobalElement and GlobalAttribute
15:22:42 [pauld]
pauld: exists not to fire the catchall
15:22:52 [pauld]
pwalmsley: might not be necessary
15:23:42 [pwalmsley]
./xs:element[@name and @type and contains(@type, ':')]/ (., @name, @type)
15:24:03 [pauld]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xmlschema-patterns-20061122/#group-GlobalElement
15:25:22 [pauld]
pauld: simplifying is goodness
15:26:07 [pauld]
ACTION: pdowney to remove @name and @type from GlobalAttribute and GlobalElement
15:26:08 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-119 - Remove @name and @type from GlobalAttribute and GlobalElement [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].
15:26:27 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-7
15:26:39 [pauld]
pwalmsley: OK with that!
15:26:59 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-8: @type colon
15:27:36 [pauld]
pwalmsley: a client also encountered this issue, so happy to withdraw the comment
15:27:45 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: lc-pwalmsley-8 rejected
15:28:16 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-9: GlobalElementSequence
15:28:38 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: accepted lc-pwalmsley-9
15:28:58 [pauld]
pwalmsley: I'm OK with that!
15:29:15 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-10: ElementMaxOccursFinite
15:29:32 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: rejected lc-pwalmsley-10
15:29:42 [pauld]
pwalmsley: I'm OK, it's incorrect
15:29:59 [pwalmsley]
.//xs:element[@maxOccurs != ('0','1','unbounded')]
15:31:20 [pauld]
pwalmsley: other comment in the mail on global element sequence - please ignore
15:31:47 [pauld]
s/rejected lc-pwalmsley-10/accepted lc-pwalmsley-10/
15:32:09 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-11: ElementEmptySequence @name
15:32:17 [pauld]
pauld: similar issue
15:32:32 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-11
15:33:04 [pauld]
Tooic: lc-pwalmsley-12: ElementEmptySequence not(node())
15:33:12 [pauld]
s/Tooic/Topic/
15:34:29 [pauld]
pauld: not (* except xs:annotation) seems good
15:34:56 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-12
15:35:37 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-13, lc-pwalmsley-14:
15:35:46 [pauld]
pauld: we've been here before!
15:35:57 [pwalmsley]
analogous to 11 and 12
15:36:09 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-13, lc-pwalmsley-14
15:36:31 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-15: Global SimpleType Declarations
15:36:53 [pauld]
pwalmsley: it's editorial, wording
15:37:08 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-15
15:37:25 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-16: GlobalSimpleType and GlobalComplexType
15:37:31 [pauld]
pwalmsley: same again!
15:37:43 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-16
15:38:07 [pauld]
Topic: lc-pwalmsley-17: StringEnumerationType
15:38:16 [pwalmsley]
withdrawn
15:38:23 [pauld]
pwalmsley: withdraw that one, cathcall picks it up
15:38:32 [pauld]
RESOLUTION: lc-pwalmsley-17 rejected
15:40:28 [pauld]
pwalmsley: I'm OK with all the resolutions!
15:41:17 [pauld]
RRSAgent, generate minutes
15:41:17 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html pauld
15:42:46 [Zakim]
-pwalmsley
15:42:51 [Zakim]
-[Sophia]
15:42:52 [Zakim]
WS_DBWG()10:00AM has ended
15:42:54 [Zakim]
Attendees were [Sophia], +1.231.218.aaaa, pwalmsley
15:43:06 [pauld]
pauld: thanks Priscilla, much valued comments!
16:31:27 [pauld]
pauld has joined #databinding
16:32:36 [Yves]
Yves has joined #databinding
16:36:53 [pauld]
pauld has left #databinding
17:09:52 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #databinding