W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

[Issue] Where did they originate from? (Inheritance)

From: Asir Vedamuthu <asir.vedamuthu@webmethods.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 12:37:56 -0700
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.1.20030123123742.02cd42d0@localhost>
To: W3C XML Schema Comments list <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>




References,

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Oct/0222.html
(member only)
[2]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-xmlschema-ref-20030109/#issue_derived_cm_not_ma
nifest

Mary and I bumped into this issue. Today, there is no mechanism to trace
back the origin of some of the components that were assembled via compiling
a complex/simple type definition.

<quote>
(5) "Inherited" portions of content model not manifest
     Suppose one type extends another type by adding additional terms to a
     sequence. In the schema component model there is no direct way to
determine
     which terms in the sequence come from the base type: the inheritance is
     "compiled out" as it were.
</quote>

How does this issue apply to Simple Type Definition? via Simple Type
Definition.{facets} property. This property is a union of the set of Facets
components resolved to by the facet [children] merged with {facets} from
{base type definition}, subject ..

For details, please refer to [1] and [2].

Regards,

Asir 
Received on Thursday, 23 January 2003 14:38:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:13:01 GMT