- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 14:04:24 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4273 ------- Comment #14 from mike@saxonica.com 2007-10-22 14:04 ------- >"If the type annotation is xs:anySimpleType or ... (including xs:anyType), then >the typed value of the node is equal to its string value, as an instance of >xs:untypedAtomic. " >which I take to mean: >(1) data on element(*, xs:anySimpleType) = xs:untypedAtomic >(2) data on element(*, xs:anyType) = xs:untypedAtomic Yes, these rules are quite explicit in the data model and elsewhere, and an awful lot of things would break if they changed. >Each of these violates the rule for substitution to work, namely: Yes, hence comment #8. In many ways xs:untypedAtomic is intended to mean "unknown type". At one stage during WG discussions I proposed that the relationship between untyped and the set of real types was the same as the relationship between null and the set of real values; we should not treat it as a type like any other. In particular, expressions such as xs:untypedAtomic :> T should return "unknown" rather than true or false. Where are the theorists when we need them?
Received on Monday, 22 October 2007 14:04:38 UTC