Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com> writes: > Just wondering how a recursive group such as: > > <xs:group name="group"> > <xs:sequence> > <xs:element name="foo"> > <xs:complexType> > <xs:group ref="group" minOccurs="0"/> > </xs:complexType> > </xs:element> > <xs:element name="bar" type="xs:token"/> > </xs:sequence> > </xs:group> > > may be redefine without confusion between the <xs:group ref="group"/> meaning > "extension", the <xs:group ref="group" minOccurs="0"/> meaning "bogus > extension" the <xs:group ref="group" minOccurs="0"/> meaning "reference" ??? I don't see the problem here. In the _redefinition_, the details of the original definition are irrelevant, and it's the redefinition with respect which the constraints are expressed. ht -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/Received on Friday, 16 November 2001 05:25:46 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:13:35 GMT