OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

XML Schema Part 2 should provide BNF for all primitive types.

> but none of these documents actually has the RE that defines a string as
> a valid float value that I was hoping to copy (at least not that I could
> find).

You couldn't find them because there is none. And I think the spec
should provide more precise definition of what are valid lexical
representation of primitive types. BNF is certainly a good way to do

Good news is, XML Schema is still a PR. That means there is still a
chance to have them add BNF. So please post your comment to
www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org about adding
BNF to the spec. I've already posted one, but the same comment from a
different person should counts.

Currently, the spec describes lexical representation without using any
formal language. For example, you can find the following statement in
the description of "number" type.

> An optional leading sign is allowed. If the sign is omitted, "+" is
> assumed. Leading and trailing zeroes are optional. 

OK. I think "0.0" is a valid "number". Since leading zeroes are optional,
it seems to me that the current spec allows ".0" as a valid "number".

There is more, by removing optional trailing zeroes, "." becomes a valid
"number". Really?  But why not?

These are happening everywhere in the spec, and much worse in date/time
related types.

So please let WG knows your thought.

E-Mail: k-kawa@bigfoot.com