W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > August 2002

RE: Restrictions on booleans

From: Biron,Paul V <Paul.V.Biron@kp.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 08:23:43 -0700
Message-Id: <8904C60CACA7D51191BC00805FEAAF43D10AD8@crdc-exch-7.crdc.kp.org>
To: "'Jeni Tennison'" <jeni@jenitennison.com>, xmlschema-dev@w3.org, Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Jeni Tennison [SMTP:jeni@jenitennison.com]
> Sent:	Thursday, August 22, 2002 6:51 AM
> To:	xmlschema-dev@w3.org; Robin Berjon
> Subject:	Re: Restrictions on booleans
> 
> > My questions are: have I understood the spec correctly, and if so
> > does that make much sense? It feels a bit strange having to use a
> > pattern here, any reason why the equivalent enumeration isn't
> > allowed?
> 
> If enumeration were allowed for xs:boolean, the only use would be to
> say that you only wanted to allow true values ("true" or "1") or only
> wanted to allows false values ("false" or "0"). I imagine that this is
> why enumerations aren't allowed for booleans -- it's not something
> that you're actually likely to want to do.
> 
That's exactly right.

pvb
Received on Thursday, 22 August 2002 11:59:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:14:34 GMT