This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
3.1.3 The Mapping between XML Representations and Components "above and beyond those implicit in the Schema for Schema Documents" implicit is a very strange choice here. change to expressed. 3.1.4 White Space from: "necessary to ensure a consistent ·validation· semantics for simple types" to: "necessary to ensure consistent ·validation· semantics for simple types" 3.2 Attribute Declarations "The {name} property must match the local part of the names of attributes being ·validated·. The value of the attribute must conform to the supplied {type definition}. A ·non-absent· value of the {target namespace} property provides for ·validation· of namespace-qualified attribute information items (" switches back and forth between singular and plural. 3.2 Attribute Declarations "The default when no simple type definition is referenced..." seems to belong with previous paragraph, remove preceding paragraph break 3.2.3 Constraints on XML ...item 4 from: "4 type and <simpleType> must not" to: "4 type and the <simpleType> child element (i.e. an anonymous in-line type def) must not" 3.2.3 Constraints on XML ...item 6 from: "not present" to: "absent" 3.2.3 Constraints on XML ...item 6.3.2 from: "corresponding to <complexType>. B's {attribute uses}" to: "corresponding to its ancestor <complexType>. B's {attribute uses}" (if this makes sense... it was hard to mentally de-ref <complexType>) 3.2.4 Attribute Declaration Validation Rules, Validation Rule: Schema-Validity Assessment (Attribute) from: "For attribute s, there is no difference" to: "For attribute information items, there is no difference" Schema Component Constraint: xsi: Not Allowed from: "Note: It is not illegal for Attribute Uses that" to: "Note: It is legal for Attribute Uses that"
In an effort to make better use of Bugzilla, we are going to use the 'severity' field to classify issues by perceived difficulty. This bug is getting severity=minor to reflect the existing whiteboard note 'easy'.
A wording proposal intended to resolve this issue was sent to the XML Schema WG on 7 March 2008. http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.omni-200803b.html (member-only link). Those interested in this issue may review the proposal and are invited to comment on it.
At its telcon on 2008-03-14, the XML Schema WG adopted the wording proposal at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.omni-200803b.html (member-only link), and believes this issue now to be resolved. John, please let us know if you agree with this resolution of your issue, by adding a comment to the issue record and changing the Status of the issue to Closed. Or, if you do not agree with this resolution, please add a comment explaining why. If you wish to appeal the WG's decision to the Director, then also change the Status of the record to Reopened. If you wish to record your dissent, but do not wish to appeal the decision to the Director, then change the Status of the record to Closed. If we do not hear from you in the next two weeks, we will assume you agree with the WG decision.
looks fine