Japan
General
1. Since this part is not normative, it should not be a standard
but rather a TR (type 3).
To be checked with ITTF. Should overviews of multipart standard
be TRs or part of the main standard?
2. Introduce a new section for schema inclusion and recommend
the use of XInclude (or external parsed entities) for syntactical
inclusion of schemas.
Accepted in Principle: XInclude is already covered in Section 6
(see Figure 1). A more detailed of the role of XInclude within DSDL
should be added to this existing section.
3. State that other parts may be added later when new
requirements are recognized.
Accepted
3.4 Schema
Replace "XML-encoded set" with "set".
Accept
3.5 The role of document schemas
Restate that an SGML document is first converted to an
information set by validation against SGML DTDs. This assumption is
stated only in the scope section.
Accept
6 Validation Management
1. Delete this section and move its content to Section 4 or
8.10.
Accepted in Principle: Rename section Validation Techniques and
add information on use of XInclude requested in Comment 2
above.
2. Figures 1 and 2 are misleading, since RNG validation does not
create any XML documents.
Change figures to show that RELAX NG, unlike W3C schema, does
not require an Infoset to be generated. Indicate clearly where
Infoset is generated and reused.
8.2 Part 2
1. Since this part is RELAX NG, the first paragraph should not
mention other regular-grammar-based schema languages.
Rejected. The first paragraph simply defines what is meant by
"regular-grammar-based schema languages"
2. Remove the last paragraph, since new parts may be added
anyway.
Accepted
NB: Change the third paragraph to include the word "schema"
before "language"
8.3 Part 3
1. Since this part is Schematron, the first paragraph should not
mention other rule-based schema languages.
Rejected: the first paragraph simply defines what is meant by
"rule-base schema languages".
2. Remove the last paragraph, since new parts may be added
anyway.
Accepted
8.4 Part 4
1. Drop the fourth paragraph (about NRL). NRL is not the only
ancestor of NVDL and NRL is not identical to NRL. Moreover, unlike
RELAX NG and Schematron, NRL is not widely used. The history of
NVDL should rather be explained in Part 4.
Accept
2. Remove the editorial notes, since NVDL already provides a
mechanims ("trigger") that specifies element names for creating
validation candidates.
Accepted in Principle: Make editorial comments generally
applicable.
>Remove the last paragraph, since NVDL schemas do specify
which schema and which schema language is used for validation
candidates.
Accepted
8.5 Part 5
1. Replace "regular expression grammars" with "regular
expressions", since regular expressions, regular grammars, and
regular right-hand-part grammars are different from each other.
Accepted
2. Mention the equivalence relationship. (e.g, are "1" and "01"
equivalent?)
Accepted.
8.6 Part 6
1. Remove the third paragraph (about extracting fragments by
XPath), since such extraction of fragments has never been in the
scope of this part.
2. Mention better integration with Part 2 (e.g., static
typechecking) as an advantage of this part.
3. This part should not have a mechanism for embedding fragments
from other documents.
4. Do not mention XPath in Part 1, since different parts have
good reasons to create different variations of XPath. In
particular, path expressions in Part 4 are NOT XPath.
5. Since extraction of fragments by XPath should be done by an
XSLT stylesheet, DSDL should not duplicate this functionality.
All rejected: Until we understand fully how our requirements
match to the XPath 2.0 specification this section cannot safely be
rewritten. It will be rewritten when we know better what the
requirements are. The current text will be withdrawn and replaced
by notes, including the above points.
8.8 Part 8
Drop entity renaming unless such renaming is implementable
without changing the behaviour of conformant XML processors.
Accepted in Principle: Entity renaming will be an optional
feature.
Norway
(comments absent from form; NB requested to
forward comments directly to working group)
As these have not been received they cannot be
disposed of.
United States
As noted in ISO/IEC CD 19757-1, Document
Schema Definition Language (DSDL) - Part 1: Overview, at page 5,
paths should be treated in part 10 of DSDL.
Accepted.
