- From: Dave Peterson <davep@iit.edu>
- Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 18:52:51 -0400
- To: Schema Comments <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
- Cc: Schema IG <w3c-xml-schema-ig@w3.org>
The (Candidate) Requirements document for 1.1 asserts under the discussion of RQ-6 that: >Discussion on the June 19, 2003, telcon >established that in the 2e draft, all simple >types to which the length facet applies have >lengths defined. I have just noticed that this is not true. QName and the related NOTATION do not appear to have a reasonable length defined. (Note that "length" is supposed to apply to the value space.) I do not recall a phase 1 decision defining length for either of these two datatypes, and the description of NOTATION in 1.1 currently asserts: >The use of ·length·, ·minLength· and ·maxLength· >on NOTATION or datatypes ·derived· from NOTATION >is deprecated. Future versions of this >specification may remove these facets for this >datatype. QName has a similar deprecation. We were in error closing out RQ-6. Frankly, I don't see any reasonable way to define a length for either; I think we should disallow the three length facets for these two datatypes as warned in 1.0 2E. -- Dave Peterson SGMLWorks! davep@iit.edu
Received on Friday, 13 May 2005 22:54:00 UTC