- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 17:13:18 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2811
Summary: align use of 'atomic' with part 2
Product: XML Schema
Version: 1.1 only
Platform: PC
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1
AssignedTo: ht@w3.org
ReportedBy: cmsmcq@w3.org
QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
At the meeting in St. Petersburg on 30 January, Sandy Gao
proposed that "We should fix the use of 'atomic ...' in Part 1
to be consistent with part 2, i.e. say 'with {variety} atomic'".
The specific reference was to clause 1.1 of Schema Component
Constraint: Derivation Valid (Restriction, Simple) in section
3.14.2 of Structures, which currently reads in part:
With one exception, the {base type definition} is an atomic
simple type definition ...
SG's proposal was to say something like
With one exception, the {base type definition} has
{variety} atomic ...
The analogous sentence in Datatypes (in section 4.1.1) reads:
If {variety} is ·atomic· then the {variety} of {base type
definition} must be ·atomic·, unless the {base type definition}
is anySimpleType.
The WG agreed to open an issue on this topic as part of its
decision to accept the wording proposal for bug 1852 aligning
parts 1 and 2.
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2006 17:13:29 UTC