Re: 'Optional' vs 'Implied' in XSchema
Ron Bourret (rbourret@dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de)
Wed, 1 Jul 1998 10:38:35 +0200
> >I know that 'Implied' is what is used within DTDs, but personally I find
> >'Optional' to be much more "to the point", I find 'Implied' quite
> >"mysterious".
>
> Implied is very mysterious. It's been an open question throughout how closely
> to stick to the spec's terminology, including its mysterious parts. If people
> feel strongly about this, we should ponder change. I think at this point the
> weight is more toward keeping the mysteries of the past alive, while
> explaining them better, but I could be persuaded to change this.
This is a good point. On the naming ballot, the second list of possible names
was meant to be non-mysterious names and for some reason I missed Implied. I
will change it there.
Simon -- does this go away anyway with the changes to the AttDef element
proposed by Chris Maden? I wasn't completely sure how those were being
implemented.
-- Ron