4793 2007-06-27 19:52:21 +0000 Restructure section 3.4 to follow the following 1) mapping from syntax to cannonical representation, 2) what constitutues a valid usage and 3) implications on instances. 2007-12-03 21:58:19 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified SML Core unspecified PC Windows XP RESOLVED FIXED editorial P1 normal LC 5108 1 bassamt popescu public-sml oldest_to_newest 15674 0 bassamt 2007-06-27 19:52:21 +0000 15798 1 sandygao 2007-07-12 16:40:42 +0000 For example, for 3.4.1 "acyclic", we could organize its subsections like the following: 3.4.1 (description) {acyclic} is an SML specific property on SML reference types. It's value is a boolean. 3.4.1.1 (maping from schema) if SML:acyclic is present, then {acyclic} has the actual value of SML:acyclic; otherwise, it has the value of {acyclic} of its base type. 3.4.1.2 (rules) it's an error if base type has {acyclic} with true and derived type has it with false. 3.4.1.3 (validation rule) if {acyclic} is true for a type, then its instances form no cycles. 16627 2 james.lynn 2007-09-17 16:32:07 +0000 This section is now 4.3. This bug requires more than restructuring and will need extensive rewriting in section 4.3.2 Constraints on Targets. Some restructuring has been done on both 4.3.1 and 4.3.2. 17295 3 virginia.smith 2007-10-17 20:01:13 +0000 Applies to all of 4.3 not just 4.3.1. Note that Section 4.3.1 will be rewritten anyway based on cycle proposal. 17909 4 sandygao 2007-11-29 18:12:52 +0000 Proposed wording available in this email. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2007Nov/0326.html 17921 5 virginia.smith 2007-11-29 23:51:19 +0000 NOTE that when this bug is fixed, the text in the sections in 4.4.1 (sml:acyclic) have changed per Bug 4639. So the proposed text in comment #4 must be merged with the new text in section 4.4.1. 17943 6 popescu 2007-12-03 21:58:19 +0000 fixed as per proposal attached under comment #4