5635 2008-04-10 15:26:20 +0000 impl-defined and impl-dependent used, but not defined 2008-06-05 18:55:03 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified SML Core+Interchange Format LC PC Windows XP RESOLVED FIXED P2 normal --- 1 johnarwe james.lynn virginia.smith public-sml oldest_to_newest 19766 0 johnarwe 2008-04-10 15:26:20 +0000 IIRC we agreed to use the Schema 1.1 definitions for these terms, but I see no evidence of that decision in either spec. Indeed, I see no definition for either term in either spec. Should we add one, by value or by reference? Editors, note: SML contains a mix of "with -" and "without -" uses of these terms, in case that tickles anyone's consistency bone. 19767 1 johnarwe 2008-04-10 15:46:32 +0000 For Schema 1.1's definitions, see http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-xmlschema11-1-20070830/#key-impl-defined and http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-xmlschema11-1-20070830/#key-impl-dep 19774 2 virginia.smith 2008-04-10 18:45:09 +0000 Resolution 4/10: editors to define terms in SML and SML-IF specs for implementation-defined and implementation-dependent. Refer to Schema 1.1 and XPath 2, XQuery to inform the creation of these definitions. Mark as needsReview when change is made. 19927 3 james.lynn 2008-04-24 13:04:30 +0000 Added definitions for both terms in both specs - Section 2.2 20045 4 kumarp 2008-05-08 01:16:40 +0000 +1 for the changes with one comment: The term 'processor' is not defined elsewhere in the spec. 20050 5 johnarwe 2008-05-08 12:42:26 +0000 wrt http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5635#c4 , I think this should be a separate bug. It is actually true of both specs. SML even uses 'processor' in its conformance section (yikes! not a good place for undefined terms). 20234 6 pratul.dublish 2008-05-22 18:55:59 +0000 Resolution in 5/22 call