- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2013 08:30:37 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22552
Bug ID: 22552
Summary: [XP3.0] subtype(A, B) and xs:error
Classification: Unclassified
Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
Version: Candidate Recommendation
Hardware: PC
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: XPath 3.0
Assignee: jonathan.robie@gmail.com
Reporter: mike@saxonica.com
QA Contact: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Section 2.5.7 says that xs:error? and xs:error+ are "identical" to
empty-sequence(). But the table in 2.5.6.1 gives different outcomes for
subtype(xs:error?, X) and subtype(empty-sequence(), X). For example, it says
that subtype(xs:error?, empty-sequence()) is false, while
subtype(empty-sequence(), empty-sequence()) is true.
I think the answer to this problem is to define another row and column in the
table labelled xs:error, and to state in an annotation to the table that
xs:error+ is treated like xs:error, while xs:error? and xs:error* are treated
like empty-sequence(). The entries in the new row and column are
subtype(xs:error, X) all rows true
subtype(X, xs:error) all rows false except subtype(xs:error, xs:error).
The existing exception in one cell of the table can then be removed.
Incidentally, we have now established that XSD 1.1 does not define a valid XML
representation for union types with no members, so in practice we can treat
xs:error as being the only such type.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 08:30:38 UTC