This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 5231 - name xpath subset used in identity constraint selectors
Summary: name xpath subset used in identity constraint selectors
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P2 minor
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard: XPath cluster
Keywords: resolved
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-10-26 15:26 UTC by John Arwe
Modified: 2008-03-19 19:57 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description John Arwe 2007-10-26 15:26:52 UTC
This bug is from the SML workgroup as a whole, decided at 2007-10-15 to -17 F2F meeting.

The SML spec wishes to use the same xpath subset Schema 1.1 uses when defining SML identity constraints across documents.  Giving that subset a name would make it easier for SML and other specs to conveniently refer to the existing definition rather than replicating the definition or using less crisp/durable means to refer to it.
Comment 1 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2008-02-04 16:17:21 UTC
In an effort to make better use of Bugzilla, we are going to use the
'severity' field to classify issues by perceived difficulty.  This 
bug is getting severity=minor to reflect the existing whiteboard note
'easy'. 
Comment 2 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2008-03-08 01:00:06 UTC
A wording proposal intended to resolve this issue was sent to the XML Schema
WG on 7 March 2008.
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.omni-200803b.html
(member-only link).  Those interested in this issue may review the proposal
and are invited to comment on it.
Comment 3 Sandy Gao 2008-03-17 20:52:59 UTC
At its telcon on 2008-03-14, the XML Schema WG adopted the wording proposal at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.omni-200803b.html (member-only link), and believes this issue now to be resolved.  

John, please let us know if you agree with this resolution of your issue, by adding a comment to the issue record and changing the Status of the issue to Closed. Or, if you do not agree with this resolution, please add a comment explaining why. If you wish to appeal the WG's decision to the Director, then also change the Status of the record to Reopened. If you wish to record your dissent, but do not wish to appeal the decision to the Director, then change the Status of the record to Closed. If we do not hear from you in the next two weeks, we will assume you agree with the WG decision.
Comment 4 John Arwe 2008-03-19 19:57:40 UTC
looks great