W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > May 2016

[Bug 29658] [SER31] Problem with schema

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 15:44:24 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-29658-523-gvXTwAUxIj@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29658

Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl

--- Comment #2 from Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl> ---
It is possible that the MS processor is actually right, the base type is a
union and the derived type restricts by pattern in a union (does this
invalidate 3.3.2.4 of W3C XML Schema?).

There's an easy fix though, I validated it successfully by replacing

  <xs:simpleType name="QName-or-EQName">
    <xs:union memberTypes="xs:QName">
      <xs:simpleType>
        <xs:restriction base="xs:token">
          <xs:pattern value="Q\{(.*)\}[\i-[:]][\c-[:]]*"/>
        </xs:restriction>
      </xs:simpleType>
    </xs:union>
  </xs:simpleType>

with:

  <xs:simpleType name="QName-or-EQName">
    <xs:restriction base="xs:token">
      <xs:pattern value="Q\{(.*)\}[\i-[:]][\c-[:]]*"/>
    </xs:restriction>
  </xs:simpleType>

Which, without looking at it too carefully, seems to be a fair change.

At the same time I am wondering why we call something "QName-or-EQName" when
the pattern only allows the EQName format (with leading "Q").

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 24 May 2016 15:44:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 24 May 2016 15:44:27 UTC