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 2096 - R-106: Clarification requested re: facets for QName type
Summary: R-106: Clarification requested re: facets for QName type
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Datatypes: XSD Part 2 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.0 only
Hardware: All All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-09-09 14:01 UTC by Sandy Gao
Modified: 2009-04-21 19:24 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description Sandy Gao 2005-09-09 14:01:55 UTC
QName allows the following facets: length, minLength, maxLength, pattern, 
enumeration, whiteSpace.

The validation rules for length, minLength, and maxLength facets in 4.3.1.3, 
4.3.2.3, 4.3.3.3 --when it comes to atomic variety-- are defined only for 
Strings and hex/base64Binary. 

Questions:

Do those three facets apply to the lexical or value space? If the latter, then 
how? The same question applies to NOTATION and anyURI (considering encoding) 
types. 
The other three facets (pattern, enumeration, whiteSpace) seem to apply to the 
lexical space. Is this correct? 

See:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2002JanMar/0218.html
Comment 1 Sandy Gao 2005-09-09 14:02:16 UTC
Discussed at the Apr. 26 telecon:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Apr/0084.html.

Re: question 1, the WG resolved:

to classify R-106a (length of QNames) as clarification w/ erratum, to specify 
in the erratum that tests on these facets for this type always succceed, and to 
deprecate the use of these facets for this type. 
to classify R-106b (length of NOTATION) as clarification w/ erratum, to specify 
in the erratum that tests on these facets for this type always succceed, and to 
deprecate the use of these facets for this type. 
to classify R-106c (length of anyURI) as clarification w/ erratum and to 
specify in the erratum that length is measured as the number of characters in 
the value (which as it happens is the same as the number of characters in the 
lexical form). 
No resolution on question 2 was reached.

May 2: Question 2 was discussed at the May 2 call and the WG resolved to 
classify it as a clarification without erratum.

Resolution
Draft text available at:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Oct/0231.html 

Text reviewed/approved with ammendments, at Oct. 24 telecon.

Erratum E2-36 added.