- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 02:00:07 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5062 ------- Comment #3 from davep@iit.edu 2007-11-02 02:00 ------- When is a union ordered? The definition of ordered says that it is ordered if there is a single primitive datatype from which all of the union's basic member types are derived. OTOH, the specification of the {value} of the ordered fundamental facet is much looser, and in fact gives the (decimal union string) datatype the ordered {value} PARTIAL, even though the union is by definition not ordered. The WG had best resolve this. It's my gut feeling that the WG intended to follow the definition, and further to allow unions that were ordered by that definition to have the {min/max}{In/Ex}clusive facets apply. But that's just a vague gut feeling unsupported by any minutes. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, because that's the way I think we should go.
Received on Friday, 2 November 2007 02:00:20 UTC