5479 2008-02-14 00:54:42 +0000 edits discussed at Jan f2f 2008-02-21 19:37:30 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified SML Core FPWD PC Windows XP RESOLVED FIXED resolved P2 normal LC 1 virginia.smith virginia.smith public-sml oldest_to_newest 19021 0 virginia.smith 2008-02-14 00:54:42 +0000 I have made some edits that were entered in my notes from the f2f meeting when reviewing the spec. The 2 major edits are: - in section 4.3.1 where the 4th bullet point (that repeats some of following section) was moved and made into narrative text. - in the conformance section (8), 4 of the model validity statements are consolidated into a note and replace with a general statement. This avoids possibly leaving something out in the conformance section. 19022 1 virginia.smith 2008-02-14 00:57:34 +0000 See diff at: http://www.w3.org/2007/10/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.w3.org%2Fcvsweb%2F%7Echeckout%7E%2F2007%2Fxml%2Fsml%2Fbuild%2Fsml.html%3Frev%3D1.168%26content-type%3Dtext%2Fhtml%3B%2520charset%3Diso-8859-1&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.w3.org%2Fcvsweb%2F%7Echeckout%7E%2F2007%2Fxml%2Fsml%2Fbuild%2Fsml.html%3Frev%3D1.169%26content-type%3Dtext%2Fhtml%3B%2520charset%3Diso-8859-1 19050 2 johnarwe 2008-02-14 16:42:55 +0000 (from the diff) nit in 8. Conformance Criteria from: This note in non-normative to : This note is non-normative B. Model Definition Document Sample (Non-Normative) suspicious: the import ns date appears to have gone backwards in time (3x) Very end of document appears to be truncated mid-sentence. Assuming that is a diff process thing since I've seen it in other cases. 19063 3 sandygao 2008-02-14 20:41:12 +0000 (Not directly related to the discussed changes.) In appendix A and B, the <xs:schema> lines are very long and don't display very well. The same applies to the IF spec, appendix A. 19109 4 kirk.wilson 2008-02-17 14:20:36 +0000 End of section 8 Note reads: This note in non-normative. The above statement means, for example, that each document in the model MUST satisfy all applicable Schematron, sml:acyclic, sml:target*, and SML identity constraints. If the note is non-normative, why does it contain a "MUST"? 19121 5 virginia.smith 2008-02-19 07:43:50 +0000 comment #4 - fixed comment #3 - this looks like a processing problem. The source does have these schemas on separate lines. This is not substantive so I am moving this comment to a new bug. comment #2 - fixed 1st point Per discussion on 2/14 meeting, the following conformance paragraph was changed to: --------------- A conforming SML model is valid if and only if it satisfies all of the following conditions: 1. In each instance document in the model, the [validity] property of the root element and all of its attributes and descendants MUST NOT be "invalid" when schema validity is assessed by a conforming schema-aware processor with respect to the referenced XML Schema documents in the model's definition documents. [XML Schema Structures] 2. Each document in the model MUST satisfy all applicable Schematron constraints when validated in the #ALL phase. 3. Each document in the model MUST satisfy all normative statements in this specification that pertain to model documents. Note: This means, for example, that each document must satisfy all applicable sml:acyclic, sml:target*, and SML identity constraints. ------------------- 19129 6 kumarp 2008-02-19 19:18:32 +0000 +1 for the changes with the following comments: [1] I assume that the fix to this bug did not actually change the xs:schema lines in the appendixes. It is probably due to stale build files. [2] The diff is trucated in appendix F. Hopefully there were no changes to be reviewed in the portion beyond that. 19147 7 johnarwe 2008-02-20 15:25:09 +0000 +1