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 16785 - simpleContent summary leaves out explicitTimezone
Summary: simpleContent summary leaves out explicitTimezone
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: PC Windows NT
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: David Ezell
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: resolved
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2012-04-18 17:47 UTC by Priscilla Walmsley
Modified: 2015-05-23 18:59 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description Priscilla Walmsley 2012-04-18 17:47:42 UTC
The XML Representation Summary for <restriction> in 3.4.2.2 lists all the other facets but leaves out explicitTimezone.  Presumably that should be allowed, and it is in the Schema for Schemas.
Comment 1 David Ezell 2012-04-20 16:26:58 UTC
Agreed.  Editorial problem.
Comment 2 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2012-10-20 20:57:29 UTC
A diffed version of the spec showing a draft erratum for this issue is now on the server at

  https://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.errata-2012.html
  (member-accessible link)

The WG did not want to review this text, so I'm marking this bug as 'needs publication'.

Priscilla, if you could, please review the resolution of the issue and let us know whether you have any objections to it.  If we don't hear from you in the next two weeks or so, we'll assume you are happy with the changes.  (If you don't currently have member access, let us know so I can send you a copy of the diffed spec.)
Comment 3 Priscilla Walmsley 2012-10-21 14:49:04 UTC
Looks good to me. Thanks!
Comment 4 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2012-11-23 17:22:56 UTC
Since PW has already reviewed and agreed with the change, I'm closing this issue.
Comment 5 Priscilla Walmsley 2015-05-23 18:59:21 UTC
Changing status from CLOSED back to RESOLVED because otherwise this bug does not appear in the search linked to from the Errata page at http://www.w3.org/XML/XMLSchema/v1.1/1e/errata.html