W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: Is "final" attribute inherited?

From: Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI <kohsuke.kawaguchi@eng.sun.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 10:30:26 -0800
To: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson)
Cc: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <20010320101656.F4BB.KOHSUKE.KAWAGUCHI@eng.sun.com>

> > <simpleType name="foo">
> >   <restriction>
> >     <simpleType name="base" final="union">
> >       <restriction base="string">
> >         ....
> >       </restriction>
> >     </simpleType>
> >     ....
> >   </restriction>
> > </simpleType>
> 
> Um, the above isn't valid -- internal types can't be named or have
> 'final'.  So I don't think your question arises.

But I still think that the spec must define inheritance behavior of
"final" attribute because there are situations where the behavior
reveals.

OK, my sample was not good.  However, "base" need not be an internal
type at all. So what about this?

<simpleType name="foo">
  <restriction base="base">
    ....
  </restriction>
</simpleType>

<simpleType name="base" final="union">
  <restriction base="string">
    ....
  </restriction>
</simpleType>

Can "foo" be used to as a member type of union?


Inheritance behavior has to be decided for all 6 patterns.

Is final="union" inherited to types derived by restriction?
Is final="union" inherited to types derived by list?
Is final="list" inherited to types derived by restriction?
Is final="list" inherited to types derived by union?
Is final="restriction" inherited to types derived by list?
Is final="restriction" inherited to types derived by union?

regards,
----------------------
K.Kawaguchi
E-Mail: k-kawa@bigfoot.com
Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2001 13:33:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:12:49 GMT