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

FW: Sch Comp Cons: Particle Derivation OK (All/Choice/Sequence:Any -- NSRecurseCheckCardinality)

From: Alessandro Triglia <sandro@mclink.it>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 10:54:24 -0500
To: "[Public XML Schema-DEV]" <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000401c39ca2$9bae43f0$8b01a8c0@aldebaran>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alessandro Triglia [mailto:sandro@mclink.it] 
> Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 10:49
> To: [Public XML Schema-DEV]
> Subject: Sch Comp Cons: Particle Derivation OK 
> (All/Choice/Sequence:Any -- NSRecurseCheckCardinality) 
> 
> 
> Hi
> 
> I think the following passage in Part 1 is wrong:
> 
> ----------------------------
> Schema Component Constraint: Particle Derivation OK 
> (All/Choice/Sequence:Any -- NSRecurseCheckCardinality) 
> 
> For a group particle to be a ·valid restriction· of a 
> wildcard particle all of the following must be true:
> 
> 1 Every member of the {particles} of the group is a ·valid 
> restriction· of the wildcard as defined by Particle Valid 
> (Restriction) (§3.9.6). 
> 
> [...]
> ----------------------------
> 
> If understood literally, this is saying that a particle of a 
> model group can be a valid restriction of a wildcard.  How 
> can a particle be a valid restriction of a **wildcard** (as 
> opposed to a **particle whose term is a wildcard**)?
> 
> If, instead, I interpret it as:
> 
> "1 Every member of the {particles} of the group is a ·valid 
> restriction· of the wildcard **particle** as defined by 
> Particle Valid (Restriction) (§3.9.6)."
> 
> it becomes clearly wrong, given that the min occurs and max 
> occurs of the "base" particle and the min occurs and max 
> occurs of the "restricted" particle have a role in 
> determining whether a "restricted" particle (say, an element 
> declaration particle) is a valid restriction of a "base" 
> particle (say, a wildcard particle).
> 
> For example, suppose I want to restrict a wildcard particle 
> (min occurs=4, max occurs=8) with a sequence particle whose 
> term has three element declaration particles.  The statement 
> above would require that **each** of the element declaration 
> particles was a valid restriction of the wildcard particle, 
> which in turn implies that **each** of the element 
> declaration particles had to have min occurs=4 max occurs=8 


I meant:  min occurs>=4,  max occurs<=8.

Alessandro



> (see §3.9.6, Schema Component Constraint: Particle Derivation 
> OK (Elt:Any -- NSCompat)).  This makes no sense.
> 
> A possible correction is rewording the sentence as follows:
> 
> -------------------
> 1 Every member of the {particles} of the group is a ·valid 
> restriction· of the wildcard particle as defined by Particle 
> Valid (Restriction) (§3.9.6), except that the min occurs of 
> the wildcard particle must be replaced by 0 before applying 
> Particle Valid (Restriction) (§3.9.6).
> -------------------
> 
> or perhaps as follows:
> 
> -------------------
> 1 Every member of the {particles} of the group is a ·valid 
> restriction· (as defined by Particle Valid (Restriction) 
> (§3.9.6))  of a particle constructed as follows:
> 
> min occurs: 	0
> max occurs: 	the same as the max occurs of the wildcard particle
> term: 		the wildcard
> -------------------
> 
> Alessandro Triglia
> OSS Nokalva
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 27 October 2003 10:56:56 GMT

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