3.4/3.13: should there be a Simply Type Definition of the Ur-Type ?

I thought there used to be a Simple Type Definition of the Ur-Type? Should
there be one in 3.13 parallel to the one for Complex Types in 3.4? Or am I
missing something?

James
--
James Tauber
jtauber@bowstreet.com
Director XML Technology
Bowstreet www.bowstreet.com

Received on Friday, 28 April 2000 04:22:40 UTC