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

Re: 2E PER probable editorial problem, min/maxExclusive facets

From: Dave Peterson <davep@iit.edu>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 10:41:03 -0400
Message-Id: <a0521063bbd1c455884f2@[192.168.0.3]>
To: Dave Peterson <davep@iit.edu>, Schema IG <w3c-xml-schema-ig@w3.org>
Cc: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org

At 2004-03-25T16:10:08-0500, I wrote

>The attempt to make redundant derivations using repeated Exclusive
>facets with the same value works only part way.  According to the
>definitions, One can derive a from decimal setting using
>maxExclusive = 29, redundantly derive b from a using maxExclusive = 29,
>but are then not permitted to derive c from b again using
>maxExclusive = 29.  (Weird, but that's the way it is.)
>
>This one-level redundancy is explicitly permitted by the definitions
>of minExclusive and maxExclusive, but didn't make its way into the
>descriptions of the schema components, nor of the XML representation
>summaries.  So they contradict the definition.  I suspect this is an
>editorial error in 2E PER.

This message is to reflexively assure myself on behalf of the WG that
the WG will consider the problem but wishes to hold off until after
the PER, and to assure the WG that I'm happy with that decision.

(In case anyone pays any attention and wonders why I bother with this
message, the answer is that the WG needs both statements "on the
record" in order to clear administrative hurdles for publication of
XML Schema 1.0 2E.)
-- 
Dave Peterson
SGMLWorks!

davep@iit.edu
Received on Thursday, 15 July 2004 10:47:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:42 UTC