W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > October to December 2003

RE: Unions: canonical lexical representation

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:04:41 -0500
To: "Alessandro Triglia" <sandro@mclink.it>
Cc: "[XML Schema Comments]" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>, "[Public XML Schema-DEV]" <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF18D0FF38.134D8D46-ON85256DE4.007EAFD5@lotus.com>

> Please note that my previous email intended to raise
> the issue in relation to PSVI contributions.  Whenever
> a value V of a datatype D *can* be represented in
> (non-canonical) lexical representation but *cannot* be
> represented in canonical lexical representation,
> certain contributions to the PSVI (say, the one for
> default attributes) will be either impossible or wrong.

Right.  I seem to recall that there are some plans to change the mechanics 
of default value handling to avoid dependencies on canonical forms in 
future releases, but I can't offhand find the reference for any such 

Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
Received on Thursday, 20 November 2003 18:05:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:09:01 UTC