- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 17:59:42 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10207 --- Comment #5 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> 2010-07-20 17:59:41 --- Comment #4 is citing the XSD 1.1 working draft, and I think the inference is correct if we take XSD 1.1 as the target. But XQuery/XPath currently cite XSD 1.0. XSD 1.0 is far less clear-cut. Section 3.3.6 in "Schema Component Constraint: Substitution Group" defines two concepts, the potential substitution group of an element and the actual substitution group, and the only things that steer us towards using the actual substitution group in preference are (a) the choice of name "actual", and (b) the feeling that that it makes more sense that way. It would probably be a good idea to clarify this. In fact it seems the XSD 1.0 definition of "actual substitution group" is not the same as the XSD 1.1 definition of "substitution group". (A) the 1.0 definition excludes abstract element declarations, while 1.1 includes them; (B) the 1.1 definition excludes element declarations whose type is "blocked" from being derived from the head's type, while the 1.0 definition includes them (they are not validly substitutable, but they are part of the actual substitution group). Why did you lead us into this swamp? -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 20 July 2010 17:59:43 UTC