RE: [XPath 2.0] XSCH-XPATH-001

> Here is the definition I see:
> 
> Each named type definition is identified either by a QName 
> (for a named type) or by an implementation-dependent type 
> identifier (for an anonymous type).
> 
> I don't see the difference between what is there and what you 
> suggest. 
> Can you help me understand this?
> 

Paul is right. The above sentence uses "named type" twice with different
meanings. We definitely need to sort this out.

Michael Kay

Received on Tuesday, 17 February 2004 09:11:25 UTC