- 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>
-----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 UTC