- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 10:45:08 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5293 ------- Comment #6 from mike@saxonica.com 2007-11-30 10:45 ------- A further example here: consider the two types B: ab?|ba? D: a?&b? [count(*)>0] where the square brackets indicate an assertion. These two types are equivalent (both allow the instances a, b, ab, or ba), and as far as I can see our current rules require processors to treat D as a valid restriction of B. But I don't think this can be done without some sophisticated theorem proving (we know they're equivalent because we can enumerate the instances, but that clearly isn't a viable strategy in the general case.) The problem is exacerbated by the fact that all the complexity arises in cases like this that will very rarely arise outwith conformance tests.
Received on Friday, 30 November 2007 10:45:14 UTC