Re: 'century' in schema for datatypes

Asir:
In the datatypes draft I sent out a little while ago, the "century"
datatype is gone.
No one seemed to like it.  Appreciate your close reading of the spec and
the
many bugs you have caught.

I'll be sending out a note on NOTATION in a few minutes to prepare the WG
for discussion next week.

All the best, Ashok


"Asir S Vedamuthu" <asirv@webmethods.com>@w3.org on 12/14/2000 02:14:23 PM

Sent by:  www-xml-schema-comments-request@w3.org


To:   "Www-Xml-Schema-Comments@W3. Org" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
cc:   "W3c-Xml-Schema-Ig" <w3c-xml-schema-ig@w3.org>, "Ningang chen"
      <nchen@webmethods.com>
Subject:  'century' in schema for datatypes



Reference - http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-xmlschema-2-20001024/#schema

[1] <simpleType name="century" id="century">
[2]  <annotation>
[3]   <documentation xml:lang="en"
source="http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#century"/>
[4] </annotation>
[5] <restriction base="timePeriod">
[6]   <period value="P100Y" fixed="true" id="century.period"/>
[7] </restriction>
[8] </simpleType>

Line 6 of this simple type definition is inconsistent with prose: "century
is generated from timePeriod by fixing the value of the duration facet
equal
to 'P100Y'"
http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-xmlschema-2-20001024/#century

Proposed resolution,

Modify the surface syntax to -
<duration value="P100Y" fixed="true" id="century.duration"/>

Regards, Asir S Vedamuthu

Received on Thursday, 14 December 2000 14:48:26 UTC