[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- From: email@example.com (Henry S. Thompson)
- To: Rick Jelliffe <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 14:03:51 +0000
"Rick Jelliffe" <email@example.com> writes:
> From: Henry S. Thompson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> >I think to claim to do so would be at best misleading -- you _can't_
> >assign types without knowing that higher (in the tree) type
> >assignments were correct, i.e. local validation and type-assigment go
> >hand in hand. Perhaps I've missed something.
> Are you saying that if there is a local declaration for an element (e.g.
> x:x/y ) but the validation for x:x fails (perhaps due a previous required
> element being missing) then y _must_ use any global declaration
> for y? That does not seem to be clear to me: is that the status quo?
No, rather that y _has no type_ in that situation.
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: email@example.com
- Re: PSVI
- From: Rick Jelliffe <firstname.lastname@example.org>