- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 08:42:30 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11103
Summary: Note in section 2.4.1 (Special datatypes as members of
a union)
Product: XML Schema
Version: 1.1 only
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Windows NT
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Datatypes: XSD Part 2
AssignedTo: David_E3@VERIFONE.com
ReportedBy: mike@saxonica.com
QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
CC: cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com
Section 2.4.1 contains the Note
It is a consequence of constraints normatively specified elsewhere in this
document that any ·primitive· or ·ordinary· datatype may occur among the
·member types· of a ·union·. (In particular, ·union· datatypes may themselves
be members of ·unions·, as may ·lists·.) The only prohibition is that no
·special· datatype may be a member of a ·union·.
It would be helpful to the reader to have a pointer to where "elsewhere" is. In
fact it's remarkably hard to find the rule that bans special datatypes from
participating in a union (if it were easier, I suspect the editor would have
included a link).
(and the same is probably also true of the previous note concerning lists).
For unions, seeking such a constraint:
* Section 2.4.1.3 says, in the introductory prose, "Any number (zero or more)
of ordinary or ·primitive· ·datatypes· can participate in a ·union· type." (But
it doesn't actually say that special datatypes can't).
* 2.4.2.3 says nothing
* 4.1.1 says nothing
* 4.1.5 says nothing
Is there anywhere else I should have looked?
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 20 October 2010 08:42:32 UTC