- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 13:54:49 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5074 ------- Comment #5 from xan.gregg@jmp.com 2008-01-03 13:54 ------- Thanks for correcting my schema -- yours is what I intended. Now I see I was reading things too literally, and that saying a type is a restriction or extension of another type was just meant as shorthand for the full definition of valid derivation. Though the section is introductory, I believe it is normative. The sentence in question uses "MUST", so I appreciate any tightening you can add.
Received on Thursday, 3 January 2008 13:54:51 UTC