W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > October 2000

Re: Deriving from abstract types

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 26 Oct 2000 08:46:34 +0100
To: Gino Basso <GBasso@ware2.com>
Cc: "'xmlschema-dev@w3.org'" <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <f5b3dhkjb8l.fsf@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Gino Basso <GBasso@ware2.com> writes:

> But how would you derive by extension from 'ObjectName' anyways (assuming
> the restriction was removed)? Or 'anyType' for that matter? Don't these
> effectively represent all potential types?
> 
> When I say 'strictly' I mean the type definition explicitly derives from
> 'ObjectName', as in the following: 
> 
>     <complexType name="NewType">
>         <complexContent>
>             <restriction base="eg:ObjectName">
>                 .
>                 .
>                 .
>             </restriction>
>         </complexContent>
>     </complexType>
> 
> That's why I was surprised when you replied that the element 'anotherName'
> in the original schema, whose type was NMTOKEN, could legally be included in
> the substitution group for 'objectName', whose type is 'ObjectName'.

Sorry to delay replying, you're probably right, I've now lost the
context and will have to go back to the archive. . .

ht
-- 
  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
          W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team
     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
	    Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
		     URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
Received on Thursday, 26 October 2000 03:46:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:14:47 UTC