http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3235 ------- Comment #1 from cmsmcq@w3.org 2007-09-19 03:53 ------- Thank you; yes, the discussion does assume that the relation between a union and its member types is acyclic (or, equivalently, that no union is a member of its own transitive membership). This is explicitly required by the Schema Representation Constraint: Simple Type Definition Representation OK in section 3.16.3 of part 1 (Structures) of XSDL 1.1. It's not clear to me how Structures section 3.16 and Datatypes section 4.1 have gotten out of synch again, after a long and trying effort to reconcile them. But it seems clear that they need to be reconciled once more.Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 03:53:47 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 October 2007 06:13:41 GMT