- From: Anli Shundi <ashundi@tibco.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:05:17 -0400
- To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- CC: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>, "'Martin Thomson'" <martin.thomson@nortel.com>, xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Actually, what I get in that case with version="XSV 2.9-1 of 2005/04/14
11:49:27" is
<bug>validator crash during complete schema preparation</bug>
But back to the question: what if the restriction is in another schema
that imports the definition of the 'strict any' ?
-Anli
Henry S. Thompson wrote:
> "Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com> writes:
>
>
>>I haven't seen that extensional interpretation of ##any used before.
>
>
> As I said, that's a bit of forward-looking to XML Schema 1.1 in
> XSV. . .
>
>
>>What if there was a global declaration
>>
>><xsd:element name="element" type="xsd:integer"/>
>>
>>Would it be the case that the restriction is invalid because none of the
>>possible elements that ##any might match has a type that's compatible with
>>xsd:token?
>
>
> Yes, in 1.1 as currently envisaged.
>
>
>>Or is there a rule somewhere that the restriction can only be a reference to
>>a globally-declared element?
>>
>>Saxon incidentally accepts the schema as supplied, although it also uses an
>>algorithm based on comparing the two FSA's to see if one subsumes the other.
>>However, it only checks the element name ("element") against the set of
>>namespaces permitted by the wildcard ("##any"), it doesn't expand the
>>wildcard into a finite set of permitted element names.
>
>
> That is correct per 1.0.
>
> ht
--
Anli Shundi ashundi@tibco.com
TIBCO Software Inc. (919) 969 6518
www.tibco.com
Received on Tuesday, 19 April 2005 19:05:36 UTC