W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > April to June 2008

[Bug 3251] how to introduce primitives

From: <bugzilla@farnsworth.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 03 May 2008 01:05:04 +0000
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Js6BU-0003og-Co@farnsworth.w3.org>


cmsmcq@w3.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
           Keywords|needsDrafting, unclassified |resolved
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

------- Comment #10 from cmsmcq@w3.org  2008-05-03 01:05 -------
The XML Schema WG today approved the wording proposals at 

  (member-only links)

and believes that with that approval, this issue has now been resolved.

Recall that the original issue report raises two related technical and
design questions.  

First, whether introducing precisionDecimal is a good idea or a bad one; 
this is essentially the same issue as bug 3120 (although expressed in 
stronger terms), which was raised by the QT groups
and was resolved to their satisfaction with the plan to take industry-wide
uptake of the new IEEE precision decimal type into account when deciding
whether to progress the spec to Proposed Recommendation with or without
the precisionDecimal type.

Second, whether XSD should stipulate, as the QT specs do, that implementations
MAY support primitive datatypes other than those defined in the XSD spec.
The wording proposals adopted today make that stipulation, and provide a 
checklist of information implementations need to provide.  The Structures
change also specifies an extension to the existing conditional-inclusion
mechanism for schema documents, to allow inclusion-time inquiries about
support for particular datatypes and facets.

Michael, as the originator of the issue, would you please examine the 
wording proposals and indicate whether or not you believe the issue has
been resolved satisfactorily or not?  If the WG does not hear from you
in the next couple of weeks, we will assume the plan concerning precision
decimal satisfies the first part of the bug, and the wording proposals 
resolve the second part, to your satisfaction.
Received on Saturday, 3 May 2008 01:05:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:50:08 UTC