 |
 |
I'm happy with the schema proposal. I notice that you have a "title" subelement. That solves my need for a longer name for sets too. But, why a subelement and not an attribute? The only good argument I can imagine for making it an element is that you anticipate it having subelements at some point and I don't see that for a schema title. Ralph > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Sanderson [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 6:45 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: 1.1 Release Date > > > What date shall we shoot for, so I can update the date in the > docs before > sending them to Ray? > > Things that need to happen: > > Matthew: We need the new schemas and WSDL, preferably ASAP > so that people > can try them out in their toolkits before they go live, to prevent the > issues of 1.0 > > Everyone: Please read over my Zeerex changes proposal to > accomodate 1.1. > Even a 'Yes, I agree' is fine. > http://www.indexdata.dk/pipermail/ex-plain/2003-November/000760.html > http://www.indexdata.dk/pipermail/ex-plain/2003-November/000761.html > http://www.indexdata.dk/pipermail/ex-plain/2003-November/000762.html > > Rob: Double check documentation, change dates and send to Ray. > > Thanks :) > > Rob > > -- > ,'/:. Dr Robert Sanderson ([log in to unmask]) > ,'-/::::. http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/ > ,'--/::(@)::. Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142 > ,'---/::::::::::. Nebmedes: http://nebmedes.o-r-g.org:8000/ > ____/:::::::::::::. > I L L U M I N A T I >