- 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