- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:56:08 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5203 ------- Comment #3 from mike@saxonica.com 2007-10-16 22:56 ------- OK, I've read the thread (glad you pointed to it, wouldn't want to have to repeat all that!) As far as I can see you want to define an abstract type O such that every O has an OID child element, and in some concrete subtypes of O, OID will have attributes and in others it won't. So why can't you define the top-level type for OID as an abstract complex type with simple content having no attributes, and then derive from it (by extension) by adding attributes where needed?
Received on Tuesday, 16 October 2007 22:56:15 UTC