Re: fixed property of the min/max/Inclusive/Exclusive facet

> I don't think this rule can be applied to the above example. The above [1]
> applies if both facets had been maxInclusive. However, in the above
example the
> base type has maxExlusive = "11" and then the derived type has
> maxInclusive="10". I'm not sure where this is in the spec or if it's
allowed to
> redefine maxInclusive although maxExclusive is set to fixed. I've found
this in
> the definition for maxExclusive [1]:
> "It is an _error_ for both _maxInclusive_ and _maxExclusive_ to be
specified in
> the same derivation step of a datatype definition."
> In the above example maxInclusive and maxExclusive are not in the same
> derivation step so I guess it's valid (then again maybe not...)


Ugg.. you are right-- That's what I get for going to quick-- I misread the
question-- I thought he was asking if it was allowable to modify the
maxExclusive in a derivation once it had been fixed.  I missed that part
about In/Ex.  Either way you are right.

Thanks for the catch!
Jeff Rafter
Defined Systems
XML Development and Developer Web Hosting

Received on Thursday, 7 June 2001 03:04:33 UTC