http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2663 Summary: wd-1: "constructed from ID" vs. "derived from ID" in Structures Product: XML Schema Version: 1.1 only Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows 2000 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 AssignedTo: ht@w3.org ReportedBy: holstege@mathling.com QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org I noticed that many occurrences of "derived from ID" (similarly IDREF/IDREFS) are replaced with "constructed from ID". Is this a conscious decision we have made? In 1.0, only those types that are derived from ID/IDREF/IDREFS by restriction are considered ID/IDREF/IDREFS types. If we use "constructed" instead, it means that lists and unions of these types are also treated specially. Don't remember we've made a decision here. Maybe I missed something. As section 2.2.1.1 mentions, one of 2 entities is used to replace the old "derived". Shouldn't the &derived; one be used instead of the &constructed; one for these cases? raised on 25 Jun 2004 by Sandy GaoReceived on Thursday, 5 January 2006 20:13:57 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 October 2007 06:13:39 GMT