- From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 10:23:51 -0700
- To: Guillaume Lebleu <gl@brixlogic.com>
- Cc: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>, xmlschema-dev@w3.org
On 7 Mar 2007, at 17:28 , Guillaume Lebleu wrote: > > With XSD 1.0, I cannot have a simpleType deriving from an abstract > type (since an abstract type has to be a complexType). > > Will this capability be available in 1.1 ? Well, it's not present in the current working drafts of either the Datatypes or the Structures part of XSD 1.1. Of course, things can change as issues are resolved. But there is no open issue in Bugzilla requesting abstract simple types, so at the moment I think it's fair to say that it seems unlikely. There have been suggestions of this kind in the past, but the WG spent a lot of time trying to work out the kinks for a proposal for abstract simple types, while 1.0 was being developed, and the upshot was that we failed. Any WG member who remembers that work is likely to be very wary about going anywhere near the topic again. Still, XSD 1.1 is not yet finished. So if you think it would be a good idea, by all means file a comment suggesting it; the best way to do that is to add a Bugzilla issue for XSD 1.1 by going to http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public and opening a bug against the 'product' XML Schema, version 1.1. Since the Datatypes spec has already gone to Last Call, and the topic has a difficult history within the WG, a proposal to allow abstract simple types is likely to meet with a lot of skepticism. So if you do suggest it, be prepared to work hard to persuade people that it's important and useful and technically feasible. Why do you want abstract simple types? --C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Received on Thursday, 8 March 2007 17:24:07 UTC