- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 18:43:54 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2180
Summary: R-186: Constraints for min/maxIn/Exclusive facets
Product: XML Schema
Version: 1.0
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: XSD Part 2: Datatypes
AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org
ReportedBy: sandygao@ca.ibm.com
QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
In the definitions of these facets, it says their values *must* be in the value
space of the base type. But there is no constraint to enforce this rule.
For example,
<simpleType name="base">
<restriction base="integer">
<enumeration value="7"/>
<enumeration value="8"/>
<enumeration value="9"/>
<restriction>
<simpleType>
<simpleType name="derived">
<restriction base="my:base">
<minInclusive value="6"/>
<restriction>
<simpleType>
"6" in the derived type isn't from the value space of the base type, so this
should be an invalid derivation, according to the definition of the
minInclusive facet. But there is no constraint saying it's invalid. Section
4.3.10.4 only talks about how the minInclusive value compares with the values
in the base.
IMO, all "XXX valid restriction" constraints in 4.3.7/8/9/10.4 should be
replaced by a simple statement saying their values must be from the value space
of the base, with the exception of min/maxExclusive, where their values could
be the same as the value of the same facet in the base type.
See : http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Nov/0233.html
Received on Wednesday, 14 September 2005 18:44:04 UTC