- 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