- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 20:10:20 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2700 ------- Additional Comments From mike@saxonica.com 2006-01-11 20:10 ------- Good point. I tend always to think of the typed value as being a function of the type name and the string value but you're right that it's not expressed that way in the data model. Clearly, to maintain consistency, when we change the type name to untyped we should change the typed value to "what it would have been" (more thought needed on how to phrase that). The isID property is a separate issue - we need to make clear whether stripping type annotations removes this property. We could go either way on this and retain consistency.
Received on Wednesday, 11 January 2006 20:10:28 UTC