<?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>5121</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2007-10-01 17:07:31 +0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>smlif 3.4.3 SML reference schemes that are not SML-IF inter-document references</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2007-11-02 13:54:46 +0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>SML</product>
          <component>Interchange Format</component>
          <version>unspecified</version>
          <rep_platform>PC</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>Windows XP</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>FIXED</resolution>
          
          
          <bug_file_loc></bug_file_loc>
          <status_whiteboard></status_whiteboard>
          <keywords>editorial, hasProposal</keywords>
          <priority>P2</priority>
          <bug_severity>normal</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>LC</target_milestone>
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter name="John Arwe">johnarwe</reporter>
          <assigned_to name="Valentina Popescu">popescu</assigned_to>
          
          
          <qa_contact name="SML Working Group discussion list">public-sml</qa_contact>

      

      

      

          <comment_sort_order>oldest_to_newest</comment_sort_order>  
          <long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>16945</commentid>
    <comment_count>0</comment_count>
    <who name="John Arwe">johnarwe</who>
    <bug_when>2007-10-01 17:07:31 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Propose we update this section to reconcile it with the recently accepted reference proposal and to clarify where we place constraints.

(1) end of first paragraph currently states &quot;...are not inter-document references in the context of SML-IF.&quot;  insert before final period the following:
, unless the reference scheme definition deterministically specifies how instances of the scheme are resolved and the reference scheme definition asserts that its instances are SML-IF inter-document references

(2) end of first paragraph &quot;Three consequences flow from this.&quot;
delete sentence

(3) first &quot;consequence&quot;: move under 3.4.0 and reword to say
Part of successfully interchanging SML documents is communicating the links between them, which SML-IF calls &quot;inter-document references&quot;.  When those links are also SML references, this implies that the consumer must understand at least one reference scheme in each SML reference in the SML-IF document.  For example, an SML reference that contains an SML EPR scheme instance (which is not an inter-document reference according to its reference scheme definition) could also contain an SML URI scheme instance (which is).

(4) second &quot;consequence&quot;: move under 3.4.0 and reword to say
SML-IF imposes the following constraints:
* SML-IF consumers MUST implement the SML URI reference scheme, to provide a basis for interoperability.
* SML-IF producers MAY use any reference scheme(s) to express each SML reference.  
* SML-IF producers concerned with wide interoperability SHOULD express SML references using the SML URI reference scheme, since that is the only reference scheme all SML-IF consumers are required to implement.

(5) third &quot;consequence&quot;: another bullet in the list in (4) above
* SML reference scheme authors MUST be explicit about whether instances of the scheme are SML-IF inter-document references.
--- this could also be put in the SML spec in the section defining requirements on new reference schemes... I am agnostic on its placement personally

(6) probably need to add &quot;SML reference scheme authors&quot; subsection under Conformance in whichever spec (5) lands in.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>17227</commentid>
    <comment_count>1</comment_count>
    <who name="Kumar Pandit">kumarp</who>
    <bug_when>2007-10-16 00:17:49 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>consensus at redmond f2f:
1. Remove 3.4.3 from SML-IF spec and move bullet point 3 to the SML spec , 
2. The SML spec will then specify that new scheme authors must indicate whether or not the new scheme is an SML-IF inter doc ref.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>17574</commentid>
    <comment_count>2</comment_count>
    <who name="Valentina Popescu">popescu</who>
    <bug_when>2007-11-02 13:54:46 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Removed section &apos;SML reference schemes that are not SML-IF interdocument references&apos; from IF

The specification under SML spec that a new scheme author must indicate whether the scheme is an IF interdocument ref had been added under defect 5865
</thetext>
  </long_desc>
      
      

    </bug>

</bugzilla>