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

Simple types: Part 1 versus Part 2

From: Helena Cavanagh <helena.cavanagh@usa.net>
Date: Thu Jan 18 13:39:41 2001
Message-ID: <20010118183926.9141.qmail@nwcst313.netaddress.usa.net>
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Dear editors,

I am reading the specification for Simple Type Definition Schema Components
and am confused by some inconsistencies between Part 1 and Part 2 of the XML
Schema specification.

--------------------------------
LISTS

Part 1 - Section 5.12 

"If the {variety} is list: 
The {_item type_ definition} must have a {variety} of atomic or _UNION_ "


Part 2 - Section 5.1.2 Derivation by List

"A list datatype must be derived from an atomic or a _LIST_ datatype, known as
the _itemType_ of the list datatype."


--------------------------------
UNIONS

Part 1 - Section 5.12
"If the {variety} is union:
The {item type definition}[*] must have {variety} of _atomic or list_"


Part 2 - Section 5.1.3 Derivation by Union

"A union datatype can be derived from two or more _atomic, list or other
UNION_ datatypes, known as the _memberTypes_ of that union datatype."

Is UNION missing in Part 1?


[*] should be {member type definitions}
--------------------------------


Thank you very much,

Helena Cavanagh


____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
Received on Thursday, 18 January 2001 13:39:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:12:49 GMT