Forwarding feedback from Robin Cover

Robin Cover wrote:

> Re: xsd:language, something rattled in my brain about RFC 3066 as being
> normative for W3C specs; unsure.
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema.xsd
>
> <q>
>
> - <xs:simpleType name="language" id="language">
> - <xs:annotation>
> <xs:documentation source="http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#language" />
> </xs:annotation>
> - <xs:restriction base="xs:token">
> - <xs:pattern value="[a-zA-Z]{1,8}(-[a-zA-Z0-9]{1,8})*"
> id="language.pattern">
> - <xs:annotation>
> <xs:documentation source="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3066.txt">pattern
> specifies the content of section 2.12 of XML 1.0e2 and RFC 3066 (Revised
> version of RFC 1766).</xs:documentation>
> </xs:annotation>
> </xs:pattern>
> </xs:restriction>
> </xs:simpleType>
>
> </q>
>
> - robin
>
> ------------
>
> On Sun, 12 Sep 2004, Garret Minakawa wrote:
>
> > I have been recently tasked with writing the section of the OAGIS
> > Design Document titled "Implementation of CCTS Schema Modules"
> > (thanks Mike).
> >
> > In writing this section, I've come across a few issues that I'd
> > like some opinions on.
> >
> > PictureType. At one point, the Architecture WG had discussed not
> > implementing this data type because it was not different enough
> > from GraphicType to warrant a separate data type. If a user had
> > a picture, they should just use GraphicType. What do you think?
> > Keep PictureType or remove it from the OAGIS implementation?
> >
> > BinaryObject - MimeCode Supplementary Component. In the ATG2
> > NDR, it designates this attribute as required. I have two
> > questions here. 1) should it be required? and 2) if it is
> > required, are some of the other supplementary components relevant
> > (e.g. encoding code, format)?
> >
> > RateType. I'd like to recommend that we do not implement this
> > data type because I don't think there is a globally accepted
> > definition or use of this term. For example, when I think of
> > rate, I think of something like "rate of acceleration" or "rate
> > of descent" which would be expressed as [number uom/uom] (50
> > miles/hour). Do you agree?
> >
> > ValueType. I'd also like to recommend that OAGIS not implement
> > this data type. The argument is not as clear as with RateType,
> > but I question whether there is enough distinction between
> > NumericType and ValueType to justify ValueType.
> >
> > TextType - LanguageLocaleIdentifier SupplementaryComponent. I
> > understand what this is and how it may be useful in certain
> > situations but I do not know of any real cases where this is
> > actually used. Furthermore, a colleague pointed out that the
> > built-in XML Schema type xsd:language is based on RFC 1766 and
> > not ISO 639. If you read RFC 1766
> > (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1766.txt), you will notice that the
> > concept of language locale is included in the language
> > representation. Therefore, from a technical XML Schema
> > perspective, LanguageLocaleIdentifier is not necessary.
> >
> > IdentifierType. The ATG2 NDR only uses two of the possible seven
> > supplementary components available for this data type -
> > IdentificationSchemeDataURI and IdentificationSchemeURI. I don't
> > understand why the other supplementary components were excluded
> > and believe they would be useful in many situations. Do you
> > agree and if yes, do you have any recommendations about which of
> > the Identifier supplementary components should or should not be
> > used?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > garret
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --