[XMLSCHEMA-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: UPA example

From: Pete Cordell <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 22:11:38 +0100
Message-ID: <001901c8dbbf$14336c50$ea00a8c0@Codalogic>
To: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>
Cc: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Re: UPA example

Original Message From: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen"


> I think explaining things to users would be somewhat simpler if
> we lost the Unique Particle Attribution rule entirely, but I have
> not succeeded in persuading the rest of the working group.


Hi Michael,

You've mentioned removing the UPA rule before.  Presumably there must be 
some sort of Particle Attribution process, so what would you suggest would 
happen if UPA was removed (as opposed to, say, the UPA rules being changed)?

Thanks,

Pete Cordell
Codalogic
For XML C++ data binding visit http://www.codalogic.com/lmx/
Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2008 21:12:37 GMT

Subscribe to the Stylus Scoop newsletter for helpful XML tips and tutorials.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company

Download Stylus Studio 6 XML Enterprise Edition

Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2007 All Rights Reserved.