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

RE: Constraining facets for ID,IDREF,ENTITY, QName & NOTATION

From: Biron,Paul V <Paul.V.Biron@kp.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 18:31:14 -0800
Message-Id: <376E771642C1D2118DC300805FEAAF43014BAA85@pars-exch-1.ca.kp.org>
To: "'jamieson_william@jpmorgan.com'" <jamieson_william@jpmorgan.com>, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	jamieson_william@jpmorgan.com [SMTP:jamieson_william@jpmorgan.com]
> Sent:	Friday, November 17, 2000 4:14 AM
> To:	www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
> Subject:	Constraining facets for ID,IDREF,ENTITY, QName & NOTATION
> 
> Hi,
> 
> following on from yesterday's email I have a further question for which I
> can find not answer in the XML Schema specification documents ..
> 
> In section 3 and in Appendix C2 of the Data Types document the primitive
> types ID, IDREF, ENTITY and QName (and its derived built-in type NOTATION)
> are documented as being subject to the constraining facets minInclusive,
> maxInclusive, maxExclusive and maxInclusive.  What does this mean?
> 
> Further, in the "Validation Rule" descriptions within sections 4.2.7 thru
> 4.2.10  for these constraining facets (i.e. minInclusive, maxInclusive,
> maxExclusive and maxInclusive) the validation criteria is described for
> the
> scenario when the value is numeric and when the value is date/time related
> but there is no mention of the validation criteria when the value is any
> of
> ID, IDREF, ENTITY and QName primitive data types.
> 
Thank you for your comment on the XML Schema specification.

The WG has voted that these types are no longer ordered, and hence do not
have the max/min in/exclusive facets.

pvb
Received on Thursday, 15 February 2001 21:33:56 GMT

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