- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 08:17:29 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3232 ------- Comment #4 from mike@saxonica.com 2008-02-05 08:17 ------- >As I see it, simple and compound types are intermediate between element and the element types of XML (defined by the unfortunately renamed "element definition", really still an element type definition). As such, they define subclasses of element (i.e., the class of which elements and only elements are instances). Well, I don't see it that way at all. When I define a simpleType by restriction from xs:integer, I'm not defining a subclass of elements. The simpleType might never be used as the type of an element, or for that matter an attribute. It might only be used as the type of an XQuery function parameter, for example. As far as I can see, the words "datatype" and "simple type" are pure synonyms. If you don't think so, can you point to some objects that belong to one category and not to the other?
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2008 08:17:36 UTC