[Bug 2554] Should UPA be a model group or particle constraint? from bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org on 2006-09-24 (www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org from July to September 2006)

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 15:01:51 +0000
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
CC:
Message-Id: <E1GRVUM-0000mG-Q6@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2554


cmsmcq@w3.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED




------- Comment #1 from cmsmcq@w3.org  2006-09-24 15:00 -------
Strictly speaking, the Unique Particle Attribution constraint is described
(both in 1.0 and in the status quo of 1.1) as applying to a 'content model',
rather than a 'model group'.  The term 'content model' is defined in 
section 2.2.3.2 as a particle:

    A particle can be used in a complex type definition to constrain the 
    &#183;validation&#183; of the [children] of an element information item;
such 
    a particle is called a content model.

In the example, the constraint applies to the particle whose term is the
sequence, not to the sequence group itself.  So the repetition information
which is essential to detecting the problem is not lost.

Does this sufficiently address the problem, or am I missing something?

Received on Sunday, 24 September 2006 15:03:14 UTC