- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 14:39:06 -0500
- To: Kevin Burges <xmldude@burieddreams.com>
- Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Kevin Burges asks whether: >> "having an <xs:all> group in a base type and extending >> it with a second <xs:all> group in a derived type is perhaps >> illegal? Yup, illegal. The general rule is that extension is defined as creating a sequence, and you can't have sequences of <all>. Extension of <all> is a known possible future function. The incomprehensible fine print is at [1] where it says: "Schema Component Constraint: Particle Valid (Extension) [Definition:] For a particle (call it E, for extension) to be a valid extension of another particle (call it B, for base) one of the following must be true: 1 They are the same particle. 2 E's {min occurs}={max occurs}=1 and its {term} is a sequence group whose {particles}' first member is a particle all of whose properties, recursively, are identical to those of B, with the exception of {annotation} properties." Where it says "...is a sequence group.." is where you get in trouble. You have an "all" group. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#cos-particle-extend ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 4 January 2002 14:51:16 UTC