- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 08:42:30 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11103 Summary: Note in section 2.4.1 (Special datatypes as members of a union) Product: XML Schema Version: 1.1 only Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows NT Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Datatypes: XSD Part 2 AssignedTo: David_E3@VERIFONE.com ReportedBy: mike@saxonica.com QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org CC: cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com Section 2.4.1 contains the Note It is a consequence of constraints normatively specified elsewhere in this document that any ·primitive· or ·ordinary· datatype may occur among the ·member types· of a ·union·. (In particular, ·union· datatypes may themselves be members of ·unions·, as may ·lists·.) The only prohibition is that no ·special· datatype may be a member of a ·union·. It would be helpful to the reader to have a pointer to where "elsewhere" is. In fact it's remarkably hard to find the rule that bans special datatypes from participating in a union (if it were easier, I suspect the editor would have included a link). (and the same is probably also true of the previous note concerning lists). For unions, seeking such a constraint: * Section 2.4.1.3 says, in the introductory prose, "Any number (zero or more) of ordinary or ·primitive· ·datatypes· can participate in a ·union· type." (But it doesn't actually say that special datatypes can't). * 2.4.2.3 says nothing * 4.1.1 says nothing * 4.1.5 says nothing Is there anywhere else I should have looked? -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 20 October 2010 08:42:32 UTC