Re: 3.4: why does absent point to definition for null in glossary? from Henry S. Thompson on 2000-04-28 (www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org from April to June 2000)

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 28 Apr 2000 10:33:33 +0100
To: James Tauber <JTauber@bowstreet.com>
Cc: "'www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org'" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <f5bpuraa7te.fsf@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>

James Tauber <JTauber@bowstreet.com> writes:

> Why does "absent" in the "Complex Type Definition of the Ur-Type" tableau
> (and possibly elsewhere) point to the definition for "null" in the glossary?

That's a bug, arising from a late decision to change from 'null' to
'absent'.

ht
-- 
  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
          W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team
     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
	    Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
		     URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/

Received on Friday, 28 April 2000 05:33:37 UTC