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 1622 - a union type does not have a base type
Summary: a union type does not have a base type
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Formal Semantics 1.0 (show other bugs)
Version: Last Call drafts
Hardware: PC Windows 2000
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jerome Simeon
QA Contact: Mailing list for public feedback on specs from XSL and XML Query WGs
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-07-15 01:14 UTC by Fred Zemke
Modified: 2005-09-06 13:03 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:

Attachments

Description Fred Zemke 2005-07-15 01:14:54 UTC 
2.4.4 Top level definitions
First para following the rules for formal EBNF, second sentence:
"In the case of a complex type, or a simple type derived by list 
or union, derivation indicates if the type is derived by extension
or restriction from its base type."  But: a union type does not 
have a base type, so the reference to them appears out of place
here.
Comment 1 Michael Rys 2005-07-20 00:13:10 UTC 
The joint XQuery/XSLT F2F meeting will resolve bug 1622 by clarifying the 
spec.  There is a base type for types derived by list or union which is 
xs:anySimpleType.  We will clarify the paragraph to clearly separate complex 
types derived by restriction from simple types derived by list or union.

Please reopen the bug if you disagree with the resolution, or close it 
otherwise.