<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/page.cgi?id=bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="5.0.4"
          urlbase="https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/"
          
          maintainer="sysbot+bugzilla@w3.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>2162</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2005-09-14 17:49:23 +0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>R-165: Clarification requested for statement in Appendix H of Structures</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2009-04-21 19:21:34 +0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>XML Schema</product>
          <component>Structures: XSD Part 1</component>
          <version>1.0/1.1 both</version>
          <rep_platform>All</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>All</op_sys>
          <bug_status>CLOSED</bug_status>
          <resolution>FIXED</resolution>
          
          
          <bug_file_loc></bug_file_loc>
          <status_whiteboard>clarification cluster</status_whiteboard>
          <keywords>resolved</keywords>
          <priority>P4</priority>
          <bug_severity>major</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>---</target_milestone>
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter name="Sandy Gao">sandygao</reporter>
          <assigned_to name="C. M. Sperberg-McQueen">cmsmcq</assigned_to>
          
          
          <qa_contact name="XML Schema comments list">www-xml-schema-comments</qa_contact>

      

      

      

          <comment_sort_order>oldest_to_newest</comment_sort_order>  
          <long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>6147</commentid>
    <comment_count>0</comment_count>
    <who name="Sandy Gao">sandygao</who>
    <bug_when>2005-09-14 17:49:23 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Appendix H of Part 1 includes the sentence:

&quot;Determinize this automaton, treating wildcard transitions as opaque.&quot; 
What is the meaning of &quot;treating wildcard transitions as opaque&quot;? 

See the following:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2002AprJun/0175.html

Henry&apos;s response:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2002JulSep/0000.html</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>6148</commentid>
    <comment_count>1</comment_count>
    <who name="Sandy Gao">sandygao</who>
    <bug_when>2005-09-14 17:49:33 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Resolved at the 2003-09-11 concall to classify R-165 as a clarification with 
erratum, and to instruct the editors to produce requisite prose.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>15199</commentid>
    <comment_count>2</comment_count>
    <who name="Sandy Gao">sandygao</who>
    <bug_when>2007-05-25 13:31:50 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Discussed at 2007-05-18 telecon. Determined this issue also applies to schema
1.1, and it is an editorial issue. Marking it accordingly.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>18852</commentid>
    <comment_count>3</comment_count>
    <who name="C. M. Sperberg-McQueen">cmsmcq</who>
    <bug_when>2008-02-08 02:19:21 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>A wording proposal including changes for this issue went to the WG
on 7 February 2008:

  http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.consent.200801.html#composition

(member-only link).</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>18899</commentid>
    <comment_count>4</comment_count>
    <who name="C. M. Sperberg-McQueen">cmsmcq</who>
    <bug_when>2008-02-08 19:56:00 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>The &apos;Structures Omnibus 1&apos; proposal mentioned in an earlier comment
was adopted by the XML Schema Working Group today.

http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.consent.200801.html (member-only link)

The XML Schema WG believes that the changes adopted today resolve this
issue fully.  I&apos;m changing its status accordingly.

The change in status should cause email to be sent to the originator of
this issue, to whom the following request is addressed.

Please review the changes adopted and 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&apos;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.</thetext>
  </long_desc>
      
      

    </bug>

</bugzilla>