- From: Michael Anderson <michael@research.canon.com.au>
- Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 14:55:20 +1100
- To: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
- Cc: XMLSchema Developer <xmlschemadev@hotmail.com>, xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com wrote: <snip> > >From [1] in the specification: > > "[Definition:] A distinguished ur-type definition is present in each XML > Schema, serving as the root of the type definition hierarchy for that > schema. The ur-type definition, whose name is anyType, has the unique > characteristic that it can function as a complex or a simple type > definition, according to context. Specifically, restrictions of the > ur-type definition can themselves be either simple or complex type > definitions." ??? Is this right? I thought anyType can function as a complex type _only_, not a simpleType. The rest of the specs seems to imply that the definition might be "The ur-type definition, whose complexType name is anyType and whose simpleType name is anySimpleType, has the unique characteristic .... ". Or am I not fully understanding the functionality of anyType and anySimpleType. cheers, mick.
Received on Sunday, 18 February 2001 22:55:31 UTC