W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > January 2008

Re: Implementations/Non-Implementations of xs:redefine?

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:15:39 +0000
To: Eliot Kimber <ekimber@reallysi.com>
Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
Message-ID: <f5bmyrfw0dw.fsf@hildegard.inf.ed.ac.uk>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Eliot Kimber writes:

> In thinking about this particular issue, I'm not sure if the other
> case can occur, where top-level schema D uses modules C and B, which
> each apply *different* redefines to groups used in base module A. I
> suspect that that case *does* occur but I'll have to verify.

As long as the redefines are to different _groups_ in A, there should
be no problem (and no order dependency).  But if C and B ever redefine
the _same_ group from A, it's an error to use them both.

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@inf.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]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHhNcLkjnJixAXWBoRAnYlAJsGaO6wvzR7CyLFuYMb5LI1x7YaUQCfZn8E
14E8S1OUYTNNh+KAvlsMx6s=
=4KWj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 9 January 2008 14:15:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:15:01 GMT