W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > February 2006

Re: complexContent extending complexType with simpleContent: why not?

From: Joe Pallas <pallas@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 09:20:31 -0800
Message-Id: <379F20BC-DF8E-4FCF-BD17-A775BAB27D47@cs.stanford.edu>
Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
To: Sandy Gao <sandygao@ca.ibm.com>


On Feb 3, 2006, at 6:53 AM, Sandy Gao wrote:

>
> > Now, it is certainly the case that ExtendedType's content is  
> actually
> > simple, not complex, ...
>
> If you look at the mapping rules for complex types [1] ({content  
> type} for <complexContent> with <extension>), it's clear that the  
> {content type} of "ExtendedType" is element-only and a particle  
> (clause 3.2.3).
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-1-20041028/#declare-type

Hmm, that's not clear to me.  Isn't the effective content empty due  
to clause 2.1.1 (and 2.1.5)?  That would make the content type the  
base type by clause 3.2.1.

joe
Received on Friday, 3 February 2006 17:20:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:14:53 GMT