W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > May 2003

RE: 1.2 Error in type hierarchy?

From: Ashok Malhotra <ashokma@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 07:25:12 -0700
Message-ID: <E5B814702B65CB4DA51644580E4853FB0846B06D@red-msg-12.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <Svgdeveloper@aol.com>, <public-qt-comments@w3.org>

I think you will agree that NMTOKEN, IDREF and ENTITY can be derived
anyAtomicType.  The three types you mention are "generated" from the
above types by using the list generator.  XML Schema terminology is
confusing because creating a list type from an atomic type is not really
derivation. It's much more like type generation.  The list type is not a
subtype of the atomic type that it is generated from. 

All the best, Ashok

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-qt-comments-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Svgdeveloper@aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 7:00 AM
> To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
> In the diagram in 1.2 of Functions & Operators the visual appearance
> that
> the xdt:anyAtomicType type is in the same hierarchy as the W3C XML
> built-in derived and primitive types.
> XPath chapter 2 indicates that an atomic type is not a list type.
> Three types in the F&O diagram - xsd:NMTOKENS, xsd:IDREFS and
> are list types, and therefore if I understand the XPath 2.0 definition
> correctly not atomic types. Therefore they cannot be derived by
> restriction
> of xdt:anyAtomicType.
> It seems to me that the diagram in F&O 1.2 is in error.
> Andrew Watt
Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2003 10:25:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:12 UTC