- From: Ashok Malhotra <ashokma@microsoft.com>
- Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 12:21:02 -0700
- To: "James Clark" <jjc@jclark.com>, "XML Schema Comments" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
James: You seem to be correct but the rules do no harm as their conditions are never satisfied. Do you really want an errata? All the best, Ashok =========================================================== -----Original Message----- From: James Clark [mailto:jjc@jclark.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 10:02 PM To: XML Schema Comments Subject: 3.2.7.3.B.1.1/2 (dateTime order relation) In section 3.2.7.3 on the order relation of dateTime, at B.1, it says: 1.. If P[i] and Q[i] are both not specified, continue to the next i 2.. If P[i] is not specified and Q[i] is, or vice versa, stop and return P <> Q This doesn't make any sense to me. When could P[i] or Q[i] be "not specified"? In dateTime all fields are specified. When things like gYearMonth appeal to the dateTime order, they do so by saying eg "the order relation on gYearMonth values is the order relation on their starting instants", so in this case also all fields are totally specified. I think the above two sentences should be deleted. James
Received on Saturday, 27 April 2002 15:21:34 UTC