- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 20:57:41 +0000
- To: Anli Shundi <ashundi@tibco.com>
- Cc: marktt@excite.com, xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Anli Shundi <ashundi@tibco.com> writes: > Well, I think point 2 of #sch-props-correct [1] > excludes such multiple definitions. From the semantics > of <include> [2] (point 3) both definitions of > such attribute are included -- they stem from two different > locations. Well, that's what I think the less-than-clear bit is -- it says: "3.1 If clause 2.1 or clause 2.2 above is satisfied, then the schema corresponding to SII' must include not only definitions or declarations corresponding to the appropriate members of its own [children], but also components identical to all the schema components of I." Ah, right -- this example is less interesting than the one I was thinking of -- I think you're right in this case there is no doubt there is an error, because the base types of the two attributes are clearly different: one is xs:float, the other an anonymous simple type defn. The case I was thinking of was where the included files are different, but each contains the same XML infoset. In that case it's open to processors to say on including the second that no error occurs, because for each component in its corresponding schema, there is _already_ "a component identical" to it, as required by the prose above. ht > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#sch-props-correct > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#src-include -- 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, 27 October 2003 15:57:50 UTC