6451 2009-01-19 20:59:17 +0000 schema component positional predicate definition may contain implicit assumptions 2009-12-11 16:58:03 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema SCDS: XML Schema Component Designators 1.1 only PC Windows XP RESOLVED FIXED decided P2 normal --- 1 johnarwe holstege David_E3 www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 23162 0 johnarwe 2009-01-19 20:59:17 +0000 Excerpt from 4.3 Interpretation of Schema Component Paths [Definition: A schema component positional predicate is a condition on the relative position of the component in the sequence of matching components from the schema component path step.] A schema component position predicate is true if the position of the target component in the sequence of components selected by the axis and name test is equal to the positive integer given in the predicate. The question is about "position of the target component". It appears to assume the common (though not universal) 1-origin method of counting used e.g. in XPath 1.0 position(). However, if an implementation chose to number sequence of selected components starting with 0 (for the off-by-one and zero-origin crowds), or indeed any arbitrary number other than 1, I find nothing in the words to say such an implementation has transgressed any normative prescription(s). 23512 1 holstege 2009-02-06 17:24:39 +0000 The WG discussed this comment at the telcon 2009-02-06 and agreed to clarify that positional predicates use a 1-based counting, like XPath. 24916 2 David_E3 2009-04-24 17:58:10 +0000 On the telcon, the WG discussed the following proposal. http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/xmlschema-current/SCD/scds-omni20090326-diff.html And adopted it with one ammendment: In section 4.2.1 the sentence first sentence now reads: "The schema component axes defined in this document are considered to be names in no namespace." This omnibus proposal is intended to close: bug 6450 bug 6451 bug 6452 24918 3 johnarwe 2009-04-24 19:46:13 +0000 looks fine, feel free to close this out