This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 1907 - RQ21: BNF, regex, etc for float and double
Summary: RQ21: BNF, regex, etc for float and double
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Datatypes: XSD Part 2 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: PC Linux
: P3 major
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: resolved
Depends on:
Blocks: 1837
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2005-08-30 16:11 UTC by C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Modified: 2008-03-05 15:53 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2005-08-30 16:11:42 UTC
As part of discharging RQ-21 (provide regex and/or BNF for all primitive
types), define a BNF and/or regex, lexical mapping, and canonical
mapping for xsd:float and xsd:double.

In discussion at the face to face meeting of August 2005 those
present leaned toward making the lexical and canonical mappings
simply refer to the relevant IEEE specs and not attempt to make
them any tighter or looser than that spec.  

[N.B. I am opening just one item for both float and double
because I assume both will need to be handled in the same way
and we might as well insist on treating them both in the same
decision.  If the WG prefers to track this as two distinct items,
this bug report will need to be split.]
Comment 1 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2005-11-01 21:34:22 UTC
This bug is addressed, along with others, by a proposal at 
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-2/datatypes.b1917.20051028.html
Comment 2 Sandy Gao 2005-11-18 17:38:51 UTC
Discussed at 2005-11-18 telecon.

There are amendments to the proposal in comment #1:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2005Oct/0021.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2005Nov/0009.html

RESOLUTION: Approve that proposal, as amended.
Comment 3 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2005-12-17 01:23:13 UTC
The proposal as approved was integrated into the status quo
document on 16 December 2005.
Comment 4 Dave Peterson 2008-03-05 15:53:40 UTC
Although no formal request for closure was made, since the reporter also noted
the resolution of this bug over two years ago, I'm marking it closed.