- 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