- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 15:06:24 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6010
--- Comment #5 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> 2008-09-03 15:06:23 ---
>As far as the implication that {complex type definition}'s {content type} includes the {base type definition}'s particles "by definition"
Which leads to the interesting observation, which I hadn't recognized before,
that when type T has a notQName="##definedSibling" wildcard, and type E is
derived from T by extension by permitting various additional optional child
elements, then an element that is valid against T might not be valid against E,
because the set of names that match ##definedSibling is different in the two
cases. Not a problem, I think, but a little unexpected.
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 3 September 2008 15:06:58 UTC