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

unsignedByte verses unsignedBtype id

From: <merks@ca.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 17:24:37 -0400
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Cc: nally@us.ibm.com, frankb@ca.ibm.com
Message-ID: <OFFCC35EFD.89D4B2C4-ON85256ADB.007237A3@torolab.ibm.com>

I have noticed what appears to be an error in Part 2 of the 2001 spec:


In Section 3, the document states:

   Each built-in datatype in this specification (both ·primitive· and
   ·derived·) can be uniquely addressed via a URI Reference constructed as

              1.the base URI is the URI of the XML Schema namespace
              2.the fragment identifier is the name of the datatype

            For example, to address the int datatype, the URI is:


Thus the URI Reference for unsignedByte would be


In the normative schema for schema, also available at


the simple type definition for unsignedByte looks like this:

                <xs:simpleType name="unsignedByte" id="unsignedBtype">
                 <xs:restriction base="xs:unsignedShort">
                   <xs:maxInclusive value="255" id

I would appear that unsignedBtype is not the correct id for this simple
type definition.  It is unique among the built-in types in having an id
that is not consistent with it's name and that is not consistent with it's
contained facet's id.  This anomaly prevents us from uniformly using
"getElementById" lookup to implement the URI support from Section 3 of Part

Would it be a violation of the standard to rectify this problem in our
cached version of the schema for schema.

Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
mailto: merks@ca.ibm.com
905-413-3265  (t/l 969)
Received on Thursday, 4 October 2001 17:24:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:57 UTC