Hi,
And now forwarding Norbert's corrected message to the Semantic Model WG
list.
Cheers,
- Ira
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Norbert Schade <Norbert.Schade at conexant.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 4:07 PM
Subject: RE: constraints: ID and IDREF
To: "Zehler, Peter" <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com>, Ira McDonald <
blueroofmusic at gmail.com>
Ups, I meant it the other way around: ID is for the resolvers and IDREF is
for the constraints.
*From:* Norbert Schade
*Sent:* Tuesday, March 18, 2014 4:07 PM
*To:* Zehler, Peter; 'Ira McDonald'
*Subject:* constraints: ID and IDREF
Pete,
When you change the constraint objects in the PWG schemas, couldn't we work
with ID type for the ResolverName of the JobConstraintsSupported and IDREF
type for the ResolverName of JobResolversSupported?
That would validate that one accesses an existing resolver.
Norbert
Norbert Schade
Systems Engineer (printing)
Imaging Solutions
Conexant Systems, Inc.
201 Jones Road
Waltham, MA 02451
U.S.A.
Tel: 1-781-370-8929
Email: norbert.schade at conexant.com
Conexant E-mail Firewall (Conexant.Com) made the following annotations
---------------------------------------------------------------------
********************** Legal Disclaimer ****************************
"This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole
use of the intended recipient. Any unauthorized review, use or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you have received the message in
error, please advise the sender by reply email and delete the message.
Thank you."
**********************************************************************
---------------------------------------------------------------------