- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 14:53:28 +0000
- To: public-xml-schema-testsuite@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4065 Summary: stZ073b - deriving from a restricted union Product: XML Schema Test Suite Version: 2006-11-06 Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows XP Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Microsoft tests AssignedTo: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk ReportedBy: mike@saxonica.com QAContact: public-xml-schema-testsuite@w3.org In the Microsoft SimpleType test set, test group stZ073b, the schema defines a type <xs:simpleType name="st.unionType"> <xs:restriction> <xs:simpleType> <xs:union memberTypes="xs:string xs:integer"/> </xs:simpleType> <xs:enumeration value="a"/> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType> Intuitively, the value "11" cannot appear as an instance of this type, and the test is therefore correct to reject it. However, the test actually has <test xsi:type="xs:integer"> 11 </test> Now in Type Derivation OK (Simple), rule 2.2.4 appears to say that xsi:type="xs:integer" is validly derived from st:unionType, because "B's {variety} is union and D is validly derived from a type definition in B's {member type definitions}." If this is the case, then the value 11 is validated against xs:integer and succeeds. This seems to be an error in the specification. Rule 2.2.4 should perhaps say "B's {variety} is union and B's {base type definition} is anySimpleType and D is validly derived from a type definition in B's {member type definitions}."
Received on Sunday, 10 December 2006 14:53:52 UTC