Re: Mixed content and simpleType

Michael Anderson <michael@research.canon.com.au> writes:

> "Henry S. Thompson" wrote:
> <snip>
> 
> >
> > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#coss-ct
> > --
> >
> 
> Sorry, I must admit I'm having trouble finding the relevant section.
> Is it clause 1.1.5 (with the Note)?  Is it saying that if you
> re-order your ancestors in any order then the complexType still
> needs to be a valid extension of its new base type???  This would
> plug the loophole of extending a restriction of a type with final =
> extension,.... but I don't think that is what 1.1.5 is saying.

It's 1.1.4 that is relevant, if I remember your initial question correctly.

1.1.4  Either the {content type} of the {base type definition} and the 
       {content type} of the complex type definition itself must be the same
       simple type definition, or else the {content type} of the complex type 
       definition itself must specify a particle and either the {content
       type} of the {base type definition} must be empty or
    1.1.4.1  both {content type}s must be mixed or both must be element-only;  
    1.1.4.2  the particle of the complex type definition must be a valid
        extension of the {base type definition}'s particle, as defined in
        Particle Valid (Extension) (5.10).  

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 Wednesday, 17 January 2001 10:11:36 UTC