- From: Christian Roth <roth@visualclick.de>
- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:06:31 +0100
- To: "XML Schema Development List" <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Michael Kay wrote: >There is a very surprising rule here: when you reference two attribute >groups and they both contain attribute wildcards, you get the intersection >of the wildcards, not the union as you might expect. Thank you! Is the "surprising rule" you refer to the one under §3.4.2-"XML Representation Summary: complexType Element Information Item"-"Complex Type Definition with simple content Schema Component"-2.2.1 (don't know if there is a more concise way of referring to that specific document location)? Yes, I would have expected a union in the same way single attribute definitions form a union, since my personal view up to now on "anyAttribute" was that it's just a slightly more generalized "attribute". Obviously, it's not, but treated quite differently. Haven't thought on this long enough, but: are there use cases for namespace intersections? Isn't the main concept of namespaces that they are orthogonal and, as a consequence, the intersection of namespace wildcards will always be empty? Ok, there is still the special "namespaces" ##local, ##targetNamespace, ##other or ##any with which it might yield a non-empty result. Regards, Christian
Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2008 12:07:09 UTC