- From: Sandy Gao <sandygao@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:25:54 -0500
- To: "Stan Kitsis" <skits@microsoft.com>
- Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Received on Friday, 13 January 2006 14:25:59 UTC
I can not comment on the *intent*, because the relative clauses existed before I joined the schema WG. FWIW, I have raised a similar issue and proposed a solution [1]. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2005JanMar/0033.html Thanks, Sandy Gao XML Parser Development, IBM Canada (1-905) 413-3255 sandygao@ca.ibm.com xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org wrote on 01/12/2006 05:15:07 PM: > Currently both system.xml and MSXML go through the 1.2 clause and > accept the xml instance as valid. We had a few discussions on this > along the lines of Michael?s response and some of us think that the _intent > _ of the spec was not to allow abstract elements in the instance > documents regardless of xsi:type (as Sandy commented). So we wanted > to see what others thought. > > Anybody else wants to comment on the _intent_ of the spec? > > Stan > > -------------------------------------- > Stan Kitsis, > Webdata - XML > Microsoft Corporation > --------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 13 January 2006 14:25:59 UTC