1834 2005-08-09 01:05:11 +0000 lexical space of unsigned types needs clarification 2008-03-08 14:06:11 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Datatypes: XSD Part 2 1.1 only PC Linux CLOSED FIXED http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2005JulSep/0011.html resolved P2 normal --- 4328 1 cmsmcq cmsmcq www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 5379 0 cmsmcq 2005-08-09 01:05:11 +0000 The prose of the spec and the schema for schemas are at odds with each other for all of the unsigned numeric types. The prose says the lexical forms of these types contain nothing but digits, but the schema for schemas defines no pattern outlawing signs. Either a pattern should be added, or the prose should be changed. The implementations I've checked mostly follow the schema for schemas; if this is true for other implementations as well, then the prose should be changed, both in 1.0 and in 1.1. 5380 1 cmsmcq 2005-08-09 01:08:33 +0000 In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2005JulSep/0016.html, Dave Peterson suggests that the right thing to do is to change the prose. 7746 2 davep 2006-01-09 21:21:37 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2005JulSep/0016.html, > Dave Peterson suggests that the right thing to do is to change the prose. Recommend that the rewording be done in the style of the SQ description of lexical mappings as in the dayDateDuration and yearMonthDuration descriptions. (In fact, this style should be used for to rewrite all "other datatypes" lexical mapping descriptions that don't follow that style.) 7836 3 cmsmcq 2006-01-15 00:14:42 +0000 The WG classified this issue as a requirement at its telcon of 13 January 2006 and instructed the editors to prepare a proposal with the obvious fix. 8036 4 cmsmcq 2006-01-28 18:23:49 +0000 A proposal to resolve this issue by changing the prose describing the relevant lexical spaces was considered and adopted on 20 January 2006.