Dick,
I have trouble with the question being posed about
deciding on a policy to deal with what to do when
there is a discrepancy between the specification
and the schema. (Let's assume both are normative.)
The spec can be wrong. The schema can be wrong.
Why do we need to decide that we will always
regard one source as "correct"? In the next
version, maybe the words will need to be rewritten,
maybe the schema will need changes.
The real problem, to me, is what to do when
a discrepancy is discovered,
and it causes an interoperability problem.
What is our recommended workaround for
vendors and users until _either_ the
spec is changed or the schema changed,
and the discrepancy is removed. I would
say that it is easier to implement a workaround
for a problem of this nature either by
ignoring the text (because it is wrong)
or issuing a schema update (because it
was wrong). Therefore, in either case,
it boils down to how
we should do schema updates.
(If both were wrong, still fix the schema
first please,
and the text later.)
And I think none of this should be used
as an excuse not to fix discrepancies
that are now known.
Dale