[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: XML Schema min/max/Inclusice/Exclusive facet question
- From: "Biron,Paul V" <Paul.V.Biron@kp.org>
- To: 'Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI' <kohsuke.kawaguchi@eng.sun.com>,KAZUMI Saito <ksaito@jp.fujitsu.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:23:35 -0700
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI [SMTP:kohsuke.kawaguchi@eng.sun.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 11:18 AM
> To: KAZUMI Saito
> Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org; xmlschema-dev@w3.org
> Subject: Re: XML Schema min/max/Inclusice/Exclusive facet question
>
> > 1. When the {primitive type definition} is float or double built-in
> type,
> > can I specify NaN, INF or -INF as value of
> min/max/Inclusice/Exclusive facet?
> > Is this constrainted in the specification ?
>
> As far as I know, yes, you can. Simply because NaN and INF and such things
> are lawful member of value space. There is no reason to prohibit them, and
> in
> fact there is no explicit statement that prohibits the use of them.
>
Yes it is legal. As for how the "special values" figure into the order
relation on float and double, the spec says [1]:
Positive zero is greater than negative zero. Not-a-number
equals itself and is greater than all float values including
positive infinity.
Naturally, negative infinity is less than all other values, even tho that is
not explicitly stated.
> > 2. About "Constraint on Schemas: maxInclusive and maxExclusive", is it
> error that
> > deriving by adding the maxInclusive facet, when the maxExclusive is
> among the
> > members of {facets} of {base type definition} ?
>
> See section 4.3.7 "CoS: maxInclusive valid restriction". It is an error
> only
> if the specified value is greater than or equal to the value of
> maxExclusive.
>
We have clarified "Cos: maxInclusive and maxExclusive" to note that the
constraint only applies within a single derivation step. That is, the
following is illegal:
<simpleType name='myType1'>
<restriction base='integer'>
<maxExclusive value='11'/>
<maxInclusive value='10'/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
while the follow is perfectly legal:
<simpleType name='myType2'>
<restriction>
<simpleType>
<restriction base='integer'>
<maxExclusive value='11'/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<maxInclusive value='10'/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
> > 3. The minExclusive facet "Constraint on Schemas: minExclusive valid
> restriction"
> > says "minExclusive is among the members of {facets} of {base type
> definition}
> > and {value} is greater than the {value} of the parent minExclusive"
> is error.
> > "greater than" is correct?
>
> I guess it's typo. It would be better to post this to
> www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org to let WG know this typo.
>
Yes, that was a typo in the PR draft and has been corrected. The first
clause of that CoS should read:
1. minExclusive is among the members of {facets} of
{base type definition} and {value} is less than the {value}
of the parent minExclusive
pvb