W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > September 2004

RE: Who tests UPA?

From: Michael Kay <mhk@mhk.me.uk>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 03:12:53 +0100
To: "'Michael Kay'" <mhk@mhk.me.uk>, "'Xan Gregg'" <Xan.Gregg@jmp.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <E1C7lm8-0000wm-Ve@frink.w3.org>

> Curiously, Saxon 8.0 reports this as ambiguous:
> 
>       <xs:sequence>
>         <xs:element name="AdminData" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>         <xs:element name="AdminData" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>       </xs:sequence>
> 
> but not this:
> 
>       <xs:sequence>
>         <xs:element ref="AdminData" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>         <xs:element ref="AdminData" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>       </xs:sequence>
> 

Perhaps it's not so curious. In the second case when you hit an AdminData
there is no ambiguity about which element declaration should be used to
validate it. I've read the UPA definition five times and I can't work out
whether the second case is supposed to be ambiguous or not - it seems to
hinge on whether two particle components can have the same properties but
still be distinct - but intuitively it seems reasonable to allow it.

Michael Kay
Received on Thursday, 16 September 2004 02:13:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:56:06 UTC