W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > October 2003

Re: Problem with .NET - Invalid particle derivation by restriction

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 18:43:55 +0100
To: "Priscilla Walmsley" <priscilla@walmsley.com>
Cc: "'Dare Obasanjo'" <dareo@microsoft.com>, "'Hugh Wallis'" <hugh_wallis@hyperion.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>, "'Rob Blake'" <robblake@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <f5br81l9eec.fsf@erasmus.inf.ed.ac.uk>

"Priscilla Walmsley" <priscilla@walmsley.com> writes:

> Hmmm.... I'm not sure that 2.2.2.1 is true.  The sequence _itself_ has
> min/maxOccurs of 1, but the rule says:
>
> "The particle within which this <sequence> appears has {max occurs} and
> {min occurs} of 1."
>
> The sequence in question is not within any particle, is it?  If not, I
> don't see how the above sentence could be true.

Well, the problem is interpreting the notation '<sequence>'.  I was
interpreting it to mean the value of the {term} property of some
Particle, and that it was that Particle which is referred to by the
phrase "The particle within which this <sequence> appears"

Consider this case:

<sequence minOccurs="3" maxOccurs="5">
 <element ref="peach"/>
 <sequence>
  <element ref="pear"/>
  <element ref="plum"/>
 </sequence>
</sequence>

It's clearly the internal sequence which is pointless, right?

ht
-- 
  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                      Half-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/
 [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Friday, 10 October 2003 13:43:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:14:40 GMT