2847 2006-02-11 01:42:29 +0000 RQ-148 Clarify the use of the word "truncation" in lexical forms. (Truncation-not-defined) 2006-02-11 02:30:04 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Datatypes: XSD Part 2 1.1 only Other All RESOLVED FIXED resolved P2 normal --- 1 cmsmcq cmsmcq www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 8212 0 cmsmcq 2006-02-11 01:42:29 +0000 This issue was originally reported by Steven Taschuk. Part 2: Datatypes frequently defines the lexical representation of one type as a "truncation" of that of another, without ever defining what is meant by this term. Sometimes it seems to have the conventional meaning of omitting characters from one end of a string, as in: The lexical representation for gYear is the reduced (right truncated) lexical representation for dateTime: CCYY. [section 3.2.11.1] Other times the omitted characters are replaced by other characters, as in: The lexical representation for gDay is the left truncated lexical representation for date: ---DD . [section 3.2.13.1] It's not difficult to understand what is meant, but the document overall aspires to (and for the most part handily achieves) a higher standard of precision. For consistency, I'd like to see the term defined in 1.1. See mail from: Steven Taschuk. (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2002OctDec/0128.html ) This is R-190. On the 11/21/2008 telcon we agreed to add to the 1.1 Requirements and classify as "Clarification without Erratum" This item was discussed in the meeting of 2004-05-12 (http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/05/xml-schema-ftf-minutes.html). ... The term 'truncation' is no longer used in discussing these lexical spaces; it is hoped that this addresses the concern adequately.