- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 13:56:08 +0000
- To: holstege@mathling.com
- Cc: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
The REC says in clause 1.5 of Schema Component Constraint: Derivation
Valid (Extension) [1]:
Note: This requirement ensures that nothing removed by a restriction
is subsequently added back by an extension.
That (rather than clause 1.2 as I think Mary was suggesting) is where
the REC tries to answer "no" to the question of "whether an attribute
[or element] removed by restriction could be added back in an
extension." However the constraint itself, in my view, fails to
achieve this, so processors which allow it are not broken.
I think we should fix this one way or another -- what do you think is
best:
1) No constraint on re-introduction;
2) No re-introduction of any kind (apparent intention of current REC);
3) Re-introduction of unchanged originals only (what the current REC
actually says)?
ht
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#cos-ct-extends
--
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@inf.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 Thursday, 22 January 2004 09:00:55 UTC