- From: Todd A. Mancini <todd.mancini@daxat.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 11:00:31 -0500
- To: <public-qt-comments@w3.org>
I know this has been answered in one way or another over the past year or so, but I'm still having trouble understanding the specifications as the language and semantic specs. don't seem to exactly agree, and the publicly available issue resolution is somewhat unreadable. If I define a function as follows: define function foo($i as element my:elementdef) { 1 } does this raise a static type error if I have not imported a schema defining element my:elementdef ? However, if I define a function as follows: define function foo($i as element my:elementdef of type xs:integer) { 1 } does this raise a static type error if I have not imported a schema defining element my:elementdef? Conversely, what if I have defined an element my:elementdef? Provided xs:integer is a subtype of the type of the globally defined my:elementdef, is this acceptable? Or, does this signature imply that the argument need only have the element name my:elementdef, with a type xs:integer, regardless of the existence of my:elementdef as a global element definition? Thanks, -Todd PS: Another difference between the language and semantic specifications relates to untyped function arguments and function return values. The language spec has them as xs:anyType whereas the semantic spec has them as item*. Although the difference is subtle, I believe that item* matches more values than xs:anyType. (e.g. (element foo, attribute bar) matches item* but not xs:anyType, whose value space has all attributes preceding all elements, assuming I'm correctly interpreting 3.2.4 in semantic spec.)
Received on Friday, 21 February 2003 11:01:04 UTC