- 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