2435 2005-11-03 12:08:52 +0000 Clarify mapping rule for {item type definition} and {member type definitions} 2006-01-28 18:25:55 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Datatypes: XSD Part 2 1.1 only PC Windows XP RESOLVED FIXED http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2005/09/xml-schema-ftf-minutes.html#d0e867 resolved P2 normal --- 1 ht cmsmcq www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 7007 0 ht 2005-11-03 12:08:52 +0000 Existing terminology runs backwards Fix agreed (strictly speaking only for {item type definition}, but intent was parallel for {member type definitions} at f2f 2005-09-26 7009 1 ht 2005-11-03 12:11:16 +0000 Resolution for {member type definitions} recorded at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2005/09/xml-schema-ftf-minutes.html#d0e1046 7028 2 ht 2005-11-04 11:52:03 +0000 WG gave explicit wording for {item type definition} -- parallel for {member type definitions} is not exact, MSM please review before final publication. 7554 3 cmsmcq 2005-12-28 01:56:01 +0000 The changes drafted in obedience to the WG's decision in Edinburgh are in the status quo document of 16 December 2005. Reviewing them today, I noticed (a) the request that I check them over carefully before integrating them into the status quo (sorry, too late for that now), and (b) some minor improvements I'd like to propose to the wording. The proposed changes to the wording should probably be sent to the WG as an editorial proposal; accordingly, I'm changing this from 'decided' to 'needsPublication', and leaving it unresolved. If the WG chair feels that the changes in question fall within the scope of purely editorial responsibility, then these changes just need review by the other editors and then integration into the status quo. 7750 4 cmsmcq 2006-01-10 02:31:17 +0000 A proposal has been sent to the WG. It's at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-2/datatypes.b2435.20060110.html (member-only link). 8037 5 cmsmcq 2006-01-28 18:25:55 +0000 The proposal was adopted 20 January 2006 and is now in the status quo documents.