W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: Objection to hexBinary and base64Binary

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 26 Apr 2001 08:39:50 +0100
To: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
Cc: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>, cbf@isovia.com, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <f5b8zkonm7t.fsf@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com writes:

> Also, and I confess I don't have the time right now to verify that
> you are correct, is it indeed true that xsi:type can override the
> normal precedence in a union?  I had presumed that, apparently
> incorrectly, the value space of the union {integer, string} included
> the abstract integer values, and all strings except those such as
> "123" that correspond to legal lexical forms of integer.  You are
> implying that:
>         <E xsi:type="xsd:string">123</E>
> is accepted and results in the value "123" being in the value space of the 
> union.  Is this really true?

Yes, otherwise the xsi:type would never have any effect (except to
cause an error in e.g. the above example).

Here's the relevant prose:

  "[Definition:] Union datatypes are those whose ·value space·s and
  ·lexical space·s are the union of the ·value space·s and ·lexical
  space·s of one or more other datatypes."

  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
          W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team
     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
	    Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
		     URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
Received on Thursday, 26 April 2001 03:40:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:56 UTC