- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 22:30:59 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3763 Summary: R-241: Question re: Validation of an element restriction whose base type has the variety union Product: XML Schema Version: 1.0 only Platform: Macintosh OS/Version: All Status: NEW Keywords: unclassified Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org ReportedBy: cmsmcq@w3.org QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org This issue is a twin of bug 2233; this copy is for XML Schema 1.0, and bug 2233 is for XML Schema 1.1; I am separating the two since they seem likely to have distinct dispositions. The comment was first raised on the xmlschema-dev mailing list by Michael Marchegay on 6 November 2003 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlschema-dev/2003Nov/0019.html); a reply by Alessandro Triglia was cross-posted to www-xmlschema-comments (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2003OctDec/0038.html). The words that follow are Marchegay's: It seems to me that the the following schema should be invalid because the value space of the base type definition of the element "e" in the type "ct-base" is not a super set of the value space of the base type definition of the element "e" in "ct-deriv"; but I cannot find any Schema Component Constraint invalidating it. <xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"> <xs:simpleType name="base"> <xs:union memberTypes="xs:boolean xs:integer"/> </xs:simpleType> <xs:simpleType name="deriv"> <xs:restriction base="base"> <xs:enumeration value="1"/> <xs:enumeration value="2"/> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType> <xs:complexType name="ct-base"> <xs:sequence> <xs:element name="e" type="deriv"/> </xs:sequence> </xs:complexType> <xs:complexType name="ct-deriv"> <xs:complexContent> <xs:restriction base="ct-base"> <xs:sequence> <xs:element name="e" type="xs:integer"/> </xs:sequence> </xs:restriction> </xs:complexContent> </xs:complexType> </xs:schema> Using cos-st-derived-ok [1], xs:integer seems to be validly derived given {extension, list, union} from deriv (because the member type definitions property of deriv is the the member type definitions of base). Therefore, rcase_NameAntTypeOK [2] is not violated, and the restriction seems to be valid. Have I missed something? [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#cos-ct-derived-ok [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#rcase-NameAndTypeOK
Received on Saturday, 23 September 2006 22:31:05 UTC