DR-08-0014: Shared MLs, Shared Simple Types: ST_String example description error

[Shawn Villaron]

Although I don't feel strongly about this, I do believe that the current text of 22.9.2.13 serves a purpose: that attributes of the same name, used in different contexts, have potentially different meanings.  The other minor issues Murata-san mentions, in my opinion, are irrelevant ( I assume this is the "heading 1" vs. "Heading 1" issue, which remains regardless of the resolution of DR-09-0027 ).

My personal preference is to resolve DR-09-0027 as no action required, make the proposed changes to DR-08-0014 and we'll use another defect report to resolve the internal inconsistencies associated with "heading 1" vs. "Heading 1".

-----Original Message-----
From: Jesper Lund Stocholm [mailto:jesper.stocholm at ciber.dk] 
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 12:14 AM
To: e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
Subject: RE: DR-08-0014: Shared MLs, Shared Simple Types: ST_String example description error

Hi all,

I was not aware of the DR Murata-san mentioned, but I agree to Murata-san's suggestion to solve DR 08-0014 by accepting the proposed solution to DR 09-0027. The text in ST_String is irrelevant to the simple type itself and should not be there.

The schema definition of ST_String simply 

s_ST_String = xsd:string

So the text in the description should be aligned with the proposed solution in DR 09-0027.



Jesper Lund Stocholm
ciber Danmark A/S

> -----Original Message-----
> From: MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) [mailto:eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp]
> Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 8:05 AM
> To: 'e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org'
> Subject: Re: DR-08-0014: Shared MLs, Shared Simple Types: ST_String 
> example description error
> 
> If we accept the proposed solution of another defect report DR
09-0027,
> the example in 22.9.2.13 will be gone.  Since some people have 
> mentioned some more (minor) issues in this example, I think that we 
> should
simply
> remove from 22.9.2.13 the second sentence and the example and we 
> should close both DR 09-0027 and DR-08-0014.  Rex, if you agree,
please
> classify both as "last call" DRs.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> --
> Makoto <EB2M-MRT at asahi-net.or.jp>