RE: Does This Violate UPA?

A local decl doesn't make it different. That was part of my "No" answer. 
 
I have a followup question involving Element Declaration Consistent. It seems to disallow 
 
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" 
elementFormDefault="qualified" attributeFormDefault="unqualified">
 
<xs:element name="root">
 <xs:complexType>
  <xs:sequence>
   <xs:element name="foo" type="xs:string" >
   <xs:element name="foo" type="xs:integer" />
  </xs:sequence>
  </xs:complexType>
 </xs:element>
 
</xs:schema>
 
yet allow 
 
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" 
elementFormDefault="qualified" attributeFormDefault="unqualified">
 
<xs:element name="root">
 <xs:complexType>
  <xs:sequence>
   <xs:element name="foo" type="xs:integer" default="10" >
   <xs:element name="foo" type="xs:integer" fixed="5" />
   <xs:element name="foo" type="xs:integer" nillable="true" />
  </xs:sequence>
  </xs:complexType>
 </xs:element>
 
</xs:schema>
 
is this by design or an oversight in the recommendation? It seems rather arbitrary to disallow one and not the other. 
 
-----Original Message----- 
From: Henry S. Thompson [mailto:ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk] 
Sent: Tue 11/5/2002 10:16 AM 
To: Dare Obasanjo 
Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org 
Subject: Re: Does This Violate UPA?



 "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com> writes:
 
 > My mistake. I meant I believe the answer is Yes. A brief distraction made me mix up the definition of particle.
 >
 >       -----Original Message-----
 >       From: Dare Obasanjo
 >       Sent: Tue 11/5/2002 9:58 AM
 >       To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
 >       Cc:
 >       Subject: Does This Violate UPA?
 >      
 >      
 >       <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
 >       <xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
 >       elementFormDefault="qualified" attributeFormDefault="unqualified">
 >       
 >        <xs:element name="foo" type="xs:string" />
 >       
 >       <xs:element name="root">
 >        <xs:complexType>
 >         <xs:sequence>
 >          <xs:element ref="foo" maxOccurs="3"/>
 >          <xs:element ref="foo" />
 >         </xs:sequence>
 >         </xs:complexType>
 >        </xs:element>
 >       
 >       </xs:schema>
 >       
 >       I believe the answer is No but can conceive of how this might be considered a gray area. It gets much grayer if both <foo>'s are local declarations.
 
 Yes, it does -- how would local decl make it different?
 
 ht
 --
   Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
           W3C Fellow 1999--2002, 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/
  [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]

Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2002 13:32:13 UTC