This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
In email [1] I raised some concerns regarding the proposed text for chapter 2 of Datatypes as found in [2]. This was discussed at the August, 2005 F2F meeting of the Schema WG, at which I was asked to enter this "bug" report, the purpose of which is to remind us to finish the redrafting of that paragraph. Noah P.S. There should be a bugzilla entry for RQ-141b and this should depend on it. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2005Jul/0001.html [2] http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-2/datatypes.rec12_main.20050622.html
DaveP's suggested wording: In the context of schema processing, schemas include a mechanism for describing and controlling the derivation and definition of additional datatypes. This mechanism is described in Section 4.
Sorry, I got the dependency backwards -- if A consists of A.1, A.2 etc., then A depends on A.1, not the other way around
This will be addressed in the revised RQ-141b proposal the editors hope to bring to the Working Group this week.
This issue is addressed by the omnibus wording proposal sent to the WG on 31 August 2005, and should be resolved by the WG's action on that omnibus proposal. The editing performed was: deleting the proposed insertion. The editors are informally of the opinion that it might be useful to provide some brief mention of simple type definitions, facets, etc. somewhere at the top of the spec (before the main body of part 3), but any proposal of that kind will be handled separately, not as part of RQ-141b.
The relevant part of the omnibus proposal of 31 August was accepted without change or comment in September 2005, so I am marking this issue as resolved.
The reporter was never formally requested to CLOSE or REOPEN this issue; this comment serves to make that request. If the resolution is acceptable, please CLOSE the issue; if not, please REOPEN it, including a comment explaining the remaining problem. If no response is received within two weeks, the issue will be routinely CLOSED.