Re: Bug in "Particle Valid (Restriction)"

This is a known XML schema issue, scheduled for fixing in a future 
release.  See [1] (may be accessible only to W3C members, not sure). 
Thanks for pointing it out though, as we'd rather be sure that we find all 
the bugs. 

Noah

[1] 
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2002/07/xmlschema-1.1-current-reqs-list.html#id-restriction

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------








<Ulrich.Post@softwareag.com>
Sent by: www-xml-schema-comments-request@w3.org
12/07/2004 12:59 PM

 
        To:     <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
        cc:     (bcc: Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM)
        Subject:        Bug in "Particle Valid (Restriction)"


Hello 
I'm wondering whether the following is a bug in the XML Schema 
Recommendation: 
At http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#rcase-NameAndTypeOK it is stated that 
     "3.2.3 R's declaration's {identity-constraint definitions} is a subset of B's declaration's 
               {identity-constraint definitions}, if any." 
To my opinion this would mean, that there are fewer constraints on R than on B 
? which is probably not intended. 
Look at the following two element declarations: 
(1) 
    <xs:element name="e"> 
      <xsd:complexType> 
        <xsd:sequence> 
          <xsd:element name="uid" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> 
        </xsd:sequence> 
      </xsd:complexType> 
    </xs:element> 
(2) 
    <xs:element name="e"> 
      <xsd:complexType> 
        <xsd:sequence> 
          <xsd:element name="uid" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> 
        </xsd:sequence> 
      </xsd:complexType> 
      <xsd:unique name="uid"> 
        <xsd:selector xpath="uid"/> 
        <xsd:field xpath="."/> 
      </xsd:unique> 
    </xs:element> 
Obviously, (1)'s identity constraints are a subset of (2)'s. 
When looking at these I end up with the conclusion that (2) is a valid 
restriction of (1) rather than vice versa. 
Would you agree on this? 
Best regards 
Uli Post

Received on Tuesday, 7 December 2004 21:32:54 UTC