- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 17 Mar 2003 08:37:26 +0000
- To: Graham Mann <gmann@adobe.com>
- Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Graham Mann <gmann@adobe.com> writes: > I have a global element G based upon complexType B that contains > (optionally in a sequence) ChildX > > ChildX in turn (again optionally in a sequence) has many grand > children GranChild1 ... GranChildN > > There is another complexType D, derived by restriction from B that > removes ChildX. This type is abstract. > > Finally there is another complexType F, (one of several similar > types) derived by extension from D. This adds a sequence containing > locally defined ChildX that has only GranChild1 > > Does the XML Schema spec, section 3.4.6: imply this is not permitted. > It does appear to work for Xerces J, Xerces C and for XMLSpy parsers. I think you're fine. That constraint is at best confusing, and probably should be removed, but as I read it you're OK -- it allows for three types in total -- a type derived from the ur-type (your B), an extension thereof, and a restriction of that. Your F is a restriction of your B, so call the extension vacuous, as you're allowed to, and you're OK. ht -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh Half-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 Monday, 17 March 2003 03:37:29 UTC