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 5058 - anySimpleType and anyAtomicType value spaces
Summary: anySimpleType and anyAtomicType value spaces
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Datatypes: XSD Part 2 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: Macintosh All
: P1 major
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard: cluster: effability
Keywords: resolved
Depends on:
Blocks: 3025
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2007-09-18 02:03 UTC by Dave Peterson
Modified: 2008-05-23 19:37 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description Dave Peterson 2007-09-18 02:03:55 UTC
Currently, the value space of anySimpleType is defined to be the union of the atomic datatypes (which is the value space of anyAtomicType) and the set of all lists of atomic datatype values.  This means that it contains lists which (by virtue of having one or more items all of whose lexical representations contain whitespace) do not have lexical values.

There is some sentiment for allowing everything as values for anySimpleType (including you, me, and my pet cats), regardless of whether or not they occur in the value space of any primitive datatype.  There is also some sentiment for doing the same to anyAtomicType.

I believe that if we do that for anySimpleType, we should also do it for anyAtomicType.  (This would also imply that lists are anyAtomicType values!)  If we choose not to do that, then we should also not allow those lists which have no lexical representations.
Comment 1 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2007-09-26 02:35:17 UTC
This appears to be a near duplicate of bug 3243, and should be 
discussed together with it and with bug 3025.
Comment 2 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2007-10-14 18:30:18 UTC
Any wording proposal for this should be coupled with resolution of
bug 3243 and bug 3025.  Accordingly, I'm marking this needsDrafting
to agree with those issues.
Comment 3 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2008-05-21 12:32:05 UTC
A wording proposal intended to resolve this issue is available at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-2/datatypes.b3025.html
(member-only link).
Comment 4 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2008-05-23 19:37:59 UTC
The wording proposal mentioned in comment #3 was adopted by the XML Schema
WG on its telcon today.  Accordingly, I'm marking this issue resolved.
Dave, as the originator you can signal your assent to this decision by
changing the status of the bug to CLOSED, or your dissent by reopening it.