Re: ISSUE-43 ISSUE 41 - Proposed resolution for membership and classification

>>> Proposed: Close Issue-41 by including in BLD membership formulae of 
>>> [...]
>>
>> An issue to take into account in discussing this is whether and how it 
>> would impact Dave's use case for the membership formula [1].
> 
> After refreshing my memory on the definition of # in BLD, I am a little 
> bit ashamed of having started that discussion, here and at the telecon 
> (blush)...
> 
> However, I think I heard Jos and maybe others say that, in its BLD 
> specification, # could not be used to state membership in types defined 
> in an XML schema, the way I imagined to use it in my example.
> 
> Can someone explain me why?

Could you send a pointer to the example you mentioned?

# denotes class membership, and an XML schema type is not the same thing 
as a class.
For example, members of a class are also members of all superclasses. 
This is not the case for XML schema types.

So, # cannot be used for XML schema type membership in the general case.
However, if you have a specific kind of reading of XML schema types 
(e.g. an object-oriented reading in which XML schema types are seen as 
classes), it might be possible to use #.  However, I did not understand 
this reading well enough to see whether # could indeed be used here.

Best, Jos

> 
> Thanx,
> 
> Christian
> 
> 

-- 
                          debruijn@inf.unibz.it

Jos de Bruijn,        http://www.debruijn.net/
----------------------------------------------
One man that has a mind and knows it can
always beat ten men who haven't and don't.
   -- George Bernard Shaw