- From: Kasimier Buchcik <kbuchcik@4commerce.de>
- Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 15:28:59 +0100
- To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- CC: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Hi, Ahh, thanks for the hint; I did poke in XML Schema Part 2, and was too blind to see this obvious statement in XML Schema Part 1. Hmm, observing the changed behaviour in Xerces-J 2.6.2 - it seems to dislike comparison with 'anySimpleType' now: does the XS world tend to move to disallow comparison with 'anySimpleType' here? If using IDCs: is the simple/complex ur-type assumed for nodes, for which no declarations exist, if processed by skip/lax wildcards? Or are IDC fields restricted to resolve to declared (or xsi:type) nodes only? Thanks & regards, Kasimier noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote: > From our brand, spanking new XML Schema 1.0 Second Edition Recommendation > [1]: > "The mapping from lexical space to value space is unspecified for items > whose type definition is the ·simple ur-type definition·. Accordingly this > specification does not constrain processors' behaviour in areas where this > mapping is implicated, for example checking such items against > enumerations, constructing default attributes or elements whose declared > type definition is the ·simple ur-type definition·, checking identity > constraints involving such items. > > Note: The Working Group expects to return to this area in a future version > of this specification." > Key/keyref are what the Recommendation calls Identity Constraints. So, > this is a rare case where processors implementing different validation > rules are all conforming. > > Noah > [1] > http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/PER-xmlschema-1-20040318/#Type_Definition_Summary > > -------------------------------------- > Noah Mendelsohn > IBM Corporation > One Rogers Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > 1-617-693-4036 > -------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > Kasimier Buchcik <kbuchcik@4commerce.de> > Sent by: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org > 10/20/04 07:45 AM > > > To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org> > cc: (bcc: Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM) > Subject: Comparison of values of anySimpleType > > > > Hi, > > I have trouble understanding how 'anySimpleType' is handled if comparing > values. Xerces and XSV seem to differ here. > > Identity-constraint example: > (using Xerces-J 2.5.1, XSV 2.5-2, MSXML 4.0) > > <sequence> > <element name="b" type="anySimpleType"/> > <element name="c" type="float"/> > </sequence> > > <b>1.0</b> > <c>1.0</c> > > with the value of 'c' being a keyref to the key value of 'b'. > > Results: XSV and MSXML do not find the referenced key, Xerces does. > > if both types are 'float': > > Results: All tree validators find the referenced key. > > I cannot find a hint for 'anySimpleType' being not comparable with the > primitive types. The PER for datatypes says: > > "anySimpleType is considered to have an unconstrained lexical space and > a ·value space· consisting of the union of the ·value space·s of all the > ·primitive· datatypes and the set of all lists of all members of the > ·value space·s of all the ·primitive· datatypes." > > Further "4.2.1 equal" says: > > "if a datatype T' is ·derived· by ·restriction· from an atomic datatype > T then the ·value space· of T' is a subset of the ·value space· of T. > Values in the ·value space·s of T and T' can be compared according to > the above rules " > > Can someone explain? > > Greetings, > > Kasimier >
Received on Monday, 1 November 2004 14:29:50 UTC