3016 2006-03-19 23:05:12 +0000 ITS schema structure redesign 2006-07-24 10:29:09 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified ITS ITS tagset WorkingDraft PC Windows XP CLOSED FIXED P2 normal LastCall20May 1 fsasaki fsasaki fsasaki oldest_to_newest 8783 0 fsasaki 2006-03-19 23:05:12 +0000 I propose to have the ITS schema design as described at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JanMar/0301.html . 8900 1 sebastian.rahtz 2006-03-27 12:49:51 +0000 In the draft, you don't need "start = itsGlobal | itsLocal itsGlobal = element documentRules { ns*, documentRule+ }" because the schemas should be fragment to be included into other schemas, and so do not need entry points. Only a wrapper schema for an external rules file needs an entry point. Don't forget, by the way, that the annotation should be put in the <desc> element in the ODD nicely 8901 2 fsasaki 2006-03-27 13:16:14 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > In the draft, you don't need > > "start = itsGlobal | itsLocal > > itsGlobal = element documentRules { ns*, documentRule+ }" > > because the schemas should be fragment to be included into other > schemas, and so do not need entry points. Only a wrapper schema > for an external rules file needs an entry point. > > Don't forget, by the way, that the annotation should > be put in the <desc> element in the ODD nicely > My idea was to split also the position of the various schema parts, e.g. translateLocal and translateGlobal would be in the section on translatability, dirLocal / dirGlobal in the "dir" section, the definition of its:rules (?) and its:rule in the section on global rules, etc. In that way, we would not need the annotations any more. What do you / other think? 8902 3 sebastian.rahtz 2006-03-27 13:23:50 +0000 > My idea was to split also the position of the various schema parts, e.g. > translateLocal and translateGlobal would be in the section on translatability, > dirLocal / dirGlobal in the "dir" section, the definition of its:rules (?) and > its:rule in the section on global rules, etc. In that way, we would not need > the annotations any more. The annotations appearing in the schema are good, though; they show up in some editors (like oXygen) when you write 9091 4 fsasaki 2006-04-08 07:06:18 +0000 No need to track schema redesign as an issue, since the massive changes due to the proposals at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JanMar/0301.html have been discussed, and - where agreed upon - implemented. 10677 5 fsasaki 2006-07-24 10:29:09 +0000 Closed, no further action necessary.