Next in thread →
Next in month →
Re: ID/IDREF strawman #2
Yes, you're right. Sorry, I read your example too quickly. I think the
right answer to your question is that in my proposal enumeration wouldn't be
done as a parameter.
<data type="xsd:qname">
<choice>
<value>foo:foo</value>
</choice>
</data>
But qname does complicate things: it means you cannot consider a datatype as
defining an equivalence class of strings; it has to have a context including
at least the in-scope namespace declarations.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI" <>
To: "TREX ML" <>
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 10:13 AM
Subject: Re: ID/IDREF strawman #2
> > Sure, there would be plenty of cases where TREX would regard two
datatypes
> > as distinct even though they accept the same set of strings. But I think
>
> Just in case, TREX regards two datatypes *equal* although they are
> *distinct* in my example.
>
> But again I agree that this is probably not a problem in practice.
>
>
> --
> Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI +1 650 786 0721
> Sun Microsystems
>
>
>
>
Next in thread →
Next in month →