28297 2015-03-23 01:02:30 +0000 [XP3.1] 2.5 Types references 2015-07-14 14:53:17 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XPath / XQuery / XSLT XPath 3.1 Candidate Recommendation PC Linux RESOLVED WONTFIX P2 minor --- 1 patrick jonathan.robie jim.melton josh.spiegel public-qt-comments oldest_to_newest 118814 0 patrick 2015-03-23 01:02:30 +0000 2.5 Types "[Definition: A schema type is a type that is (or could be) defined using the facilities of [XML Schema 1.0] or [XML Schema 1.1] (including the built-in types of [XML Schema 1.0] or [XML Schema 1.1]).] A schema type can be used as a type annotation on an element or attribute node (unless it is a non-instantiable type such as xs:NOTATION or xs:anyAtomicType, in which case its derived types can be so used). Every schema type is either a complex type or a simple type; simple types are further subdivided into list types, union types, and atomic types (see [XML Schema 1.0] or [XML Schema 1.1] for definitions and explanations of these terms.)" XML Schema 1.0 - XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes Second Edition - http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/ XML Schema 1.1 - W3C XML Schema Definition Language (XSD) 1.1 Part 2: Datatypes - http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/ would be more precise references. And since the paragraph immediately preceding invokes the two schema data type standards, one wonders why the prose is littered here with repettion of same? 122025 1 josh.spiegel 2015-07-14 14:31:04 +0000 The text covers complex types so we shouldn't exclude Part 1 in the references. I think the pair of references after "built-in types" could be removed. 122027 2 jonathan.robie 2015-07-14 14:53:17 +0000 (In reply to Josh Spiegel from comment #1) > The text covers complex types so we shouldn't exclude Part 1 in the > references. I think the pair of references after "built-in types" could be > removed. I agree. I just removed it. But I'm not making the basic change Patrick suggests.