- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 18:09:46 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2047 ------- Comment #2 from cmsmcq@w3.org 2007-10-14 18:09 ------- At the ftf meetings of October 2007, the XML Schema WG discussed this issue together with the XML Query and XSL WGs (in the context of a discussion of bug 3243). QT vigorously argued that the direction outlined for this issue in the comments on bug 2045 and bug 2046 should be reversed and that XSDL should align with QT in treating the difference between atomic values and singleton lists containing those atomic values as a purely metaphysical distinction. After discussion, we agreed to instruct the editors to prepare wording proposals for Datatypes (bug 2046) and structures (bug 2047), in which it's made clear that for XSDL purposes singleton lists are not distinguished from the atomic values which are their list items. As far as we could tell, this would affect only identity constraints, since we couldn't think of any way to construct an enumeration or a fixed value constraint which would involve comparison of an atomic to a singleton list. (Further thought shows that a union of a pattern-restricted integer with a list of differently pattern-restricted integers would allow tests to be constructed.) These wording proposals will, we hope, be useful in achieving agreement on the correct technical direction. (That is, they are phase-1 proposals, not phase-2 proposals.) Before we make any final decisions, we should perform some due diligence to see if existing processors all do the same thing in these cases (and what that thing is) and whether existing schemas seem likely to be affected.
Received on Sunday, 14 October 2007 18:09:58 UTC