- From: Mary Holstege <holstege@mathling.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 07:55:47 -0800
- To: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>
- Cc: W3C XML Schema Comments list <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
C. M. Sperberg-McQueen writes: > > The description of the predicate in steps for simple types > says that the predicate is: > > If {variety} is union and the [name] is empty, the pair > {position, n} where n is the position of the simple type > definition among {member type definitions} > > but I think the text needs to distinguish between the {variety} > of the simple type being selected in the step and that of its > parent, if any. > > A top-level simple type which happens to be a union does not > need a numeric predicate; its name will sufficiently identify > it. It is only an anonymous simple type defined within a > union that needs a number. > > Or am I wrong? > > -CMSMcQ No, I believe you are correct. I suppose one can imagine that the general rule about pruning the predicate {position,1} in the concrete syntax applies, but I think we just missed this one. -- Mary Holstege@mathling.com
Received on Tuesday, 31 December 2002 10:55:53 UTC