[Bug 2947] Datatypes 2006-02-17 WD: what makes an order trivial?

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2947





------- Additional Comments From davep@iit.edu  2006-02-28 20:41 -------
(In reply to comment #2)

> Yes. I would prefer to get rid of all mention of a trivial order (and the "null"
> order, for that matter). The min/max facets are still well-defined whether the
> order is trivial or not. It's just that no value is value if there is a
> minExclusive facet on a trivially ordered datatype, for exmaple. No big deal.

That would be a change in the "unordered" datatypes; we currently simply prohibit
those order-related facets on the "unordered" datatypes--your proposal would
allow them (admittedly resulting in a singleton or empty value set for the derived
datatype).  I don't think it's likely that that will happen at this stage of 1.1.  Will
look into describing the situation better.

Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2006 20:40:07 UTC