W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > July to September 2005

[Bug 1933] New: (re)move primitive (and derived) simple type defns from SDForSDs

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:23:58 +0000
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Cc:
Message-Id: <E1EArr4-0000dz-F4@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1933

           Summary: (re)move primitive (and derived) simple type defns from
                    SDForSDs
           Product: XML Schema
           Version: 1.1
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: XSD Part 2: Datatypes
        AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org
        ReportedBy: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
         QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org


Proposition:  Including the simple type definitions for the primitive builtin 
datatypes in the schema document for schema documents is neither necessary nor 
desireable.

As it stands many schema validators reject the schema document at 
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema.xsd because of these definitions, and they 
aren't needed to fulfil the primary purpose of the SDForSDs, namely to 
constrain the structure of schema documents.

In 2e we attempted to patch around the ways in which the SDForSDs violated our 
own constraints on SDs, but the result is arguably imperfect, and certainly 
doesn't contribute to the simplicity of the spec.

We could just remove them altogether, or put them in a separate section of the 
REC and/or a separate schema document on the Web.

The simple type definitions for the built-in derived datatypes are also not 
necessary -- should we (re)move them also?

One note of caution -- we have published URIs of the form 
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string and 
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int.maxInclusive
and the SDForSD contains anchors with those names.  Some people might suppose 
that those two things are connected, but it's not clear to me that in fact they 
are. . .
Received on Thursday, 1 September 2005 16:24:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:13:09 GMT