W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xsd-databinding@w3.org > June 2006

RE: ISSUE-9: union pattern for pending document

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 12:53:04 +0100
Message-ID: <2A7793353757DB4392DF4DFBBC95225504BFEABD@I2KM11-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <peter.hendry@capeclear.com>, <jon.calladine@bt.com>
Cc: <public-xsd-databinding@w3.org>

> This union will always assign values as xsd:string when binding XML to 
> objects as xs:string will match any text value. The xs:date will never 
> be used. At least that is my understanding of union processing.

yeah Part 2 says:

The ·value space· and ·lexical space· of 
a ·union· datatype are the union of the ·value space·s 
and ·lexical space·s of its ·memberTypes·. ·union· 
datatypes are always ·derived·. "

So we can add other examples for this pattern to exercise other 
combinations, e.g. "xs:int xs:date", "xs:long xs:language" 
but as Peter points out, how many of these make sense?

Also, is having more than two types combined allowed allowed, 
or is each allowed combination really a different pattern 
- i.e is "Union" really too coarse grained?

Received on Thursday, 15 June 2006 11:53:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:58:12 UTC