OK. done.
I verified 2nd sample Metalink in ID with updated schema using rnv
program and it worked correctly!

On Jul 28, 12:50 am, Anthony Bryan <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Tatsuhiro<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > The schema snippet in the main section(such as 4.1.1) uses &
> > connector, while in Appendix B, only , connector is used.
>
> > 4.1.1:
>
> >  462    metalinkMetalink =
> >  463       element metalink:metalink {
> >  464          metalinkCommonAttributes,
> >  465          (metalinkFiles
> >  466           & metalinkGenerator?
> >  467           & metalinkOrigin?
> >  468           & metalinkPublished?
> >  469           & metalinkType?
> >  470           & metalinkUpdated?
> >  471           & extensionElement*),
> >  472       }
>
> > Appendix B:
> >  1644      element metalink:metalink {
> >  1645        element metalink:generator {
> >  1646          metalinkTextConstruct
> >  1647        }?,
> >  1648        element metalink:origin { metalinkUri }?,
> >  1649        element metalink:type { "static" | "dynamic"  }?,
> >  1650        element metalink:published { metalinkDateConstruct }?,
> >  1651        element metalink:updated { metalinkDateConstruct }?,
>
> > RELAX NG schema says that & connector and , connector mean differently
> > (practically it is not a problem I think..), should we have to update
> > Appendix B according to main section?
>
> thank you. please update Appendix B so it is correct.
>
> > I also noticed referencing metalinkCommonAttributes is missing in
> > Appendix B. Is it intentional or should it be inserted in every
> > element?
>
> unintentional, please fix that as well if possible.
>
> --
> (( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [http://www.metalinker.org]
>   )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Metalink Discussion" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to