- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2002 17:38:06 +0100
- To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org, "zze-MARCHEGAY Michael stagiaire FTRD/DTL/LAN" <michael.marchegay@rd.francetelecom.com>
- CC: "Eddie Robertsson" <erobertsson@allette.com.au>
Hi Michael, > I'm sorry to have submitted an invalid schema. But would it have > been invalid if I had written the following schema instead? > > <xsd:schema xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"> > <xsd:simpleType name="foo"> > <xsd:restriction base="xsd:string"> > <xsd:enumeration value="A"/> > <xsd:enumeration value="AA"/> > <xsd:enumeration value="AAA"/> > </xsd:restriction> > </xsd:simpleType> > > <xsd:element name="bar"> > <xsd:simpleType> > <xsd:restriction base="foo"> > <xsd:minLength value="2"/> > </xsd:restriction> > </xsd:simpleType> > </xsd:element> > </xsd:schema> > > XML Spy 4.3 validates this schema but sqc doesn't. It complains that > <xsd:minLength value="2"/> is not compatible with the enumeration > facets defined by the ancestors foo, however I can't find out the > clause that justifies that in the Recommandation. There's no constraint (that I can see) that states that the length specified in a derived type has to be such that all the enumerations in the base type are still legal. Indeed, it would be a very weird derivation by restriction if it didn't allow you to restrict the values that you were allowed to have. The above schema looks perfectly fine to me; the bar element can only have the values 'AA' and 'AAA'. Cheers, Jeni --- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com/
Received on Sunday, 11 August 2002 12:38:08 UTC