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 3236 - xsi:type
Summary: xsi:type
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Datatypes: XSD Part 2 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard: medium, work (careful response needed...
Keywords: changeDeclined
Depends on: 3227
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2006-05-09 10:11 UTC by Michael Kay
Modified: 2007-08-08 12:05 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description Michael Kay 2006-05-09 10:11:00 UTC
QT approved comment:

Section 2.6.1.3 contains a mention of xsi:type, treating it as if it
modified the mapping function from lexical values onto values of a union
type. This would mean that the mapping from lexical space to value space is
not actually a simple function as described in 2.4: it becomes a function
that takes two parameters, the lexical value and the value of xsi:type. It
would be better to treat xsi:type not as "overriding the evaluation order",
but rather as causing a different datatype, and hence a different mapping
function, to be invoked.
Comment 1 Dave Peterson 2007-08-08 03:28:09 UTC
(In reply to comment #0)
> QT approved comment:
> 
> Section 2.6.1.3 contains a mention of xsi:type, treating it as if it
> modified the mapping function from lexical values onto values of a union
> type. This would mean that the mapping from lexical space to value space is
> not actually a simple function as described in 2.4: 

We're correcting wording elsewhere so as to make the lexical mapping not necessarily a function see, e.g., bug 3227.  Accordingly, I'm unilaterally marking this one wontfix and change declined.

If the commenter does not agree with this resolution, please reopen the bug; if you do, please mark it closed.  If there is no response within two weeks, we will assume the resolution is acceptable.  (You can, of course, still object to the planned resolution of bug 3227.)