Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Feb 17, 2024. It is now read-only.

Proposed clarification for wrapped.#574

Open
petrochenko-pavel-a wants to merge 1 commit intoraml-org:masterfrom
petrochenko-pavel-a:patch-3
Open

Proposed clarification for wrapped.#574
petrochenko-pavel-a wants to merge 1 commit intoraml-org:masterfrom
petrochenko-pavel-a:patch-3

Conversation

@petrochenko-pavel-a
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Suggestion for inner xml element name clarification. I am not sure about naming for inner elements in the case of object types. (primary use case for wrapped + object types is solving polymorphism which is loosely specified in the spec)

Suggestion for inner xml element name clarification. I am not sure about naming for inner elements in the case of object types. (primary use case for wrapped + object types is solving polymorphism which is loosely specified in the spec)
@sichvoge sichvoge added this to the Patch Release 2016/31/10 milestone Oct 4, 2016
@sichvoge
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

sichvoge commented Oct 4, 2016

Can you work a little bit more on the text @petrochenko-pavel-a. I am not sure if it is completely clear. We can also add another example, or two, to clarify the naming convention for wrapped nodes.

@sichvoge sichvoge removed this from the Patch Release 2016/31/10 milestone Apr 11, 2017
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants