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 6031 - Oops! in algorithm of precisionDecimalCanonicalMap
Summary: Oops! in algorithm of precisionDecimalCanonicalMap
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Datatypes: XSD Part 2 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: All All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: editorial, resolved
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-09-06 02:42 UTC by Dave Peterson
Modified: 2009-04-21 18:14 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description Dave Peterson 2008-09-06 02:42:11 UTC
Oops I discovered while commenting on bug 3248:

Step 5 of the algorithm for precisionDecimalCanonicalMap begins
  "Otherwise, it will be the case that nV is less than 1E−6 or greater than 1E6."

Actually, it should read
  "Otherwise, it will be the case that nV is less than 1E−6 or greater than 1E6 or aP is less than zero."

I believe the actual subalgorithm under Step 5 is correct even in this added case.
Comment 1 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2008-09-12 15:36:37 UTC
Agreed 12 September 2008.
Comment 2 David Ezell 2008-10-31 19:10:26 UTC
Fixed in the editorial proposal file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/david_e3/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/OLK7/datatypes%200809dpmisc.html#rf-timezoneOffset

Search on "6031" to find the relevant bit.
Comment 3 Sandy Gao 2009-02-13 14:41:25 UTC
Seems the published draft [1] doesn't contain a fix for this bug. There is an "Editorial Note: Fix for bug 6031." (which shouldn't be there), but not the actual fix.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-xmlschema11-2-20090130/
Comment 4 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2009-04-21 18:00:21 UTC
The status-quo version of Datatypes now has the following text for step
5 of the algorithm in question:

    Otherwise, it will be the case that nV is less than 1E−6 or greater than 
    1E6, or that aP is less than zero.  

From this fact, I infer that the correction has now been made successfully
and that this bug report can be marked RESOLVED.

Dave, as the originator of the issue, please CLOSE or REOPEN the bug
to signal that you do or do not agree with the resolution.  If the WG
does not hear otherwise from you by this Friday, we will assume you are
content.