Michael Kay scripsit:
> Yes, it's possible - you can restrict the lexical space of a simple type
> without restricting its value space by using the pattern facet. But in
> this case, one would have to ask "to what purpose". It's essentially
> just imposing one's personal taste, rather like restricting numbers to
> disallow a leading "+" sign. You can tell when someone is committed to
> standards by the fact that they conform even when it goes against their
> personal taste.
In this case, a new standard is being defined, and it's entirely
appropriate when referring to an existing standard to decide that the
full standard is inappropriate and subset it explicitly.
--
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Does anybody want any flotsam? / I've gotsam.
Does anybody want any jetsam? / I can getsam.
--Ogden Nash, No Doctors Today, Thank You
