[Bug 6190] New: Multiple Attribute Wildcards

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6190

           Summary: Multiple Attribute Wildcards
           Product: XML Schema
           Version: 1.0/1.1 both
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Structures: XSD Part 1
        AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org
        ReportedBy: David_E3@VERIFONE.com
         QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org


The WG explored an answer to the questions at the face to face meeting.

Michael Kay sent several emails outlining the issue:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2008Oct/0009.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2008Oct/0014.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2008Oct/0015.html

>From the IRC log:
<MSM> The WG discussed this issue at some length during the ftf today.
<MSM> There was some sympathy for the premise of the issue report, that
<MSM> union is a more natural operation in the situations mentioned.
<MSM> Further examination persuaded us that (a) references to two different
<MSM> attribute groups with different wildcards uses intersection, extension
<MSM> uses union with the base, and (b) sometimes union is the natural
<MSM> operation, and sometimes intersection is the natural operation (see
<MSM> minutes of the meeting for examples with terse commentary).
<MSM> Eventually we lost confidence that making the change proposed here
<MSM> would actually produce more reliably useful results.  
<MSM> Since there is no logical contradiction here, but instead at most an
<MSM> unexpected feature of the design, we decided to close this as
<MSM> WORKSFORME before we remembered that no Bugzilla record has been
<MSM> opened for this question.  

We are creating this issue so that we can close it, but track it properly.


-- 
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, 29 October 2008 22:13:57 UTC