Re: XML Schema Datatype guidelines

[Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI <kohsuke.kawaguchi@eng.sun.com>]

> I think the key point is that the cross-reference semantics is not part of 
> validity.  There is nothing to stop a RELAX NG validator combining other 

Hmm, I see.



> >> Anything else? Do we want to deprecate things that aren't well-defined?
> >
> > For example?
> 
> You are more of an expert on this than me.

I was trying to understand your sentence better.


For one thing, the length facet of QName type is not defined in the spec.
Did you mean something like this?


Also, what we may want to do?

  (1) prohibit QName type from having the length facet?
  (2) allow implementations to reject it?
  (3) encourage implementations to reject it?


By the way, the length facet is also not defined for anyURI and NOTATION.




Other things that may be of interest.

- the language type and RFC1766 are inconsistent.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0390.html

- non-European cannot use the "time" type.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0366.html



regards,
--
Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI                          +1 650 786 0721
Sun Microsystems                   kohsuke.kawaguchi@sun.com