This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
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 "...are not inter-document references in the context of SML-IF." 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 "Three consequences flow from this." delete sentence (3) first "consequence": 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 "inter-document references". 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 "consequence": 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 "consequence": 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 "SML reference scheme authors" subsection under Conformance in whichever spec (5) lands in.
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.
Removed section 'SML reference schemes that are not SML-IF interdocument references' 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