[Bug 19504] [QT3TS] instanceof139


--- Comment #9 from Tim Mills <tim@cbcl.co.uk> ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> There are plenty of other cases where the extent of a type P is clearly a
> subset of the extent of another type S, but P is not substitutable for S.
> For example, the pair (P=xs:unsignedByte, S=xs:int), or the pair
> (P=string(length<5), S=string(length<10)) Agreed, this situation is
> undesirable (and in the case of the integer subtypes, makes them fairly
> unusable), but it's a consequence of the original decision to go with "named
> typing" and I think we have to live with it.

To be clear, the 'matches' judgement does not hold for the sort of pairings you
are describing here.  The unsigned byte value B does not match xs:int. 
However, it does hold that all values which match union(P,Q) also match

I am increasingly convinced that the decision made for XSD doesn't make a great
deal of sense for XQuery.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Saturday, 13 October 2012 19:17:13 UTC