[Bug 2233] R-241: Question re: Validation of an element restriction whose base type has the variety union

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2233


cmsmcq@w3.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
           Keywords|unclassified                |resolved
         Resolution|                            |FIXED
            Version|unspecified                 |1.1 only




------- Comment #2 from cmsmcq@w3.org  2006-09-23 22:46 -------
The problem identified here is the same as the one mentioned in
bug 2333; it has been addressed in XML Schema 1.1 by eliminating 
the practice of 'flattening' union, thus ensuring that when a
union is restricted, its union-level facets are not lost when
it is named as a member of another union.  The same change addresses
the problem identified here, in which the union-level facets are lost
when restriction is checked.  Under the new rules, the restriction
of ct-base by ct-deriv is not legal, since the type assigned to
element e in ct-deriv is not a restriction of the type assigned
to that element in ct-base.

The original comment still applies to XML Schema 1.0, and I have
made a separate issue for 1.0 (bug 3763).

With the change to the treatment of unions, which is reflected in
the current published working draft, I believe this issue has been
resolved, so I am changing its status to RESOLVED / FIXED.

Received on Saturday, 23 September 2006 22:46:57 UTC