This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 5731 - allow internationalization of tag names in XML Schema
Summary: allow internationalization of tag names in XML Schema
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w...
Whiteboard:
Keywords: unclassified
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-06-06 14:11 UTC by David Ezell
Modified: 2008-06-13 18:52 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description David Ezell 2008-06-06 14:11:21 UTC
I18N approached the Schema WG about this topic.  Essentially, the issue is that language "elements" like <xs:element> are spelled in English.  This limitation can be a severe hurdle for people who would like to use the technology but who either don't speak English, or who don't speak English well.

There are at least two ways this requirement might be addressed:
1) using substitution groups to define a "substitute language".
2) using an "approved catalog" of name mappings.

The first solution depends on XML Schema itself, and might require adjustments to the proposed 1.1 Recommendation.  The second is possibly orthogonal to the REC.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2008Apr/0004.html
Comment 1 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2008-06-13 18:49:32 UTC
The Working Group discussed this issue today at its telcon.  We weren't 
quite sure what to do with it; proposals included reclassifying it
as an enhancement request for a future version, resolving with
disposition LATER, and closing as WONTFIX on the grounds that the
specific task described is outside the scope of the XSD spec.  (The
counter-argument for this was that the job of XSD or any schema language
is to ensure that something like what is described is possible, and that
we need more study to understand the problem area better.)

In the end, those present on the call decided to close the issue as
WONTFIX; the staff contact is recorded as dissenting on behalf of his
colleagues in the i18n activity.

David, please indicate your willingness to acquiesce in this 
disposition by closing the issue, or your unwillingness to do so by
reopening it.  
Comment 2 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2008-06-13 18:52:08 UTC
It should also be mentioned that some WG members on today's call argued
that the fate of this issue is intimately bound up with bug 5764: if
we had that, they said, we would have this, and without it not.  But we
did not decide to create a dependency between the two bugs, owing primarily
to time pressure, which prevented the exploratory discussion necessary
to find out whether the group had consensuse on the dependency relation.