- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 18:43:54 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2180 Summary: R-186: Constraints for min/maxIn/Exclusive facets Product: XML Schema Version: 1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: XSD Part 2: Datatypes AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org ReportedBy: sandygao@ca.ibm.com QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org In the definitions of these facets, it says their values *must* be in the value space of the base type. But there is no constraint to enforce this rule. For example, <simpleType name="base"> <restriction base="integer"> <enumeration value="7"/> <enumeration value="8"/> <enumeration value="9"/> <restriction> <simpleType> <simpleType name="derived"> <restriction base="my:base"> <minInclusive value="6"/> <restriction> <simpleType> "6" in the derived type isn't from the value space of the base type, so this should be an invalid derivation, according to the definition of the minInclusive facet. But there is no constraint saying it's invalid. Section 4.3.10.4 only talks about how the minInclusive value compares with the values in the base. IMO, all "XXX valid restriction" constraints in 4.3.7/8/9/10.4 should be replaced by a simple statement saying their values must be from the value space of the base, with the exception of min/maxExclusive, where their values could be the same as the value of the same facet in the base type. See : http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Nov/0233.html
Received on Wednesday, 14 September 2005 18:44:04 UTC