On 19/10/06 08:48, "Peter G. Lane" <lane@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
Given the text in the bes specification (v26), the type of the elements within ActivityStatusType should not be xsd:anyType, but should use the definitions as follows. This is in line with the extensible state model as described in the specification:
The difference being the ##other namespace, right? Otherwise I think they're functionally equivalent.
I guess as long as it's functionally equivalent I don't care. I wasn't sure that it is, but you're right, it is ... well ... other than the ##other. Is that so important, I wonder?
Um ... how can we track these issues, and (more importantly) quickly get some closure on them in order to update our implementations?
Great question. I lost track of where the spec is. Last I remember it was going to be edited for release. What's going on with that? Unless someone objects, I think we could easily hold a lazy vote (i.e. -1, +0, +1) on these schema "bug fixes" and then update the spec if no -1's are encountered within a few days.
I'm for this ... it would be nice to get some of these things changed before the final spec is written. :-) -- Chris