- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 20:45:42 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2306 cmsmcq@w3.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|w3c-xml-schema-wg@w3.org |cmsmcq@w3.org Status|ASSIGNED |NEW Keywords|unclassified |needsAgreement Priority|P2 |P1 Version|unspecified |1.1 only ------- Additional Comments From cmsmcq@w3.org 2005-12-09 20:45 ------- The WG discussed this item on 9 December 2005 and agreed to treat it as a requirement for 1.1 that we clarify whether anySimpleType may or must not be used as a member of a union. But 2574 raises the same question for version 1.0; it may be relevant to this issue because if 1.0 has a clear answer to this question, some WG members will prefer not to change the answer in 1.1. There is a minor error in comment 1 -- it is clause 3.1 of Schema Component Constraint: Derivation Valid (Restriction, Simple), not Simple Type Definition Properties Correct, which appears to rule out anySimpleType. 3.1 The {member type definitions} must all have {variety} of atomic or list. (http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#cos-st-restricts) This clause must change, however, in any case, since the resolution of bug 2044 (retain union-level facets) requires that member types of variety union be allowed. (See bug 2044 comment 2, see also bug 2333, which is the Structures part of that issue.)
Received on Friday, 9 December 2005 20:45:50 UTC