W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > April to June 2004

XML schema draft comments: pt.1 3.3.6 pair canonical form undefined?

From: Daniel Barclay <daniel@fgm.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 15:36:01 -0400
Message-ID: <40CF4FA1.4090908@fgm.com>
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org

Regarding the draft at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/PER-xmlschema-1-20040318/:

Section 3.3.6 says:

   PSVI Contributions for element information items

   [schema default]
     The canonical lexical representation of the
     declaration's {value constraint} value.

Is the canonical lexical representation of {value constraint}
values actually defined somehow?

Canonical lexical representations seem to be defined only for
datatypes:

   [Definition:]  A canonical lexical representation is a set of
   literals from among the valid set of literals for a datatype
   ...

However, the {value constraint} property is not defined to be
of any datatype.  It is only defined to be a pair [single quotes
represent italics]:

   {value constraint}
     Optional.  A pair consisting of a value and one of
     'default', 'fixed'.

Is does not appear that:
- "pair" is defined as some XML Schema list type (e.g., what is
   the atomic item type?), or
- the canonical representation of "a pair" is defined.



Daniel
Received on Tuesday, 15 June 2004 15:36:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:15:34 UTC