xml-dev - Re: Derivation by Restriction

[Stefan Haustein <stefan.haustein@trantor.de>]

> During the writing of some C++ classes for the representation of data
> conforming with a particular schema I began to wonder about the
> "translation" of an arbitrary schema to domain specific objects
> (pretty much in the way exactml or some oracle products do nowadays
> with DTDs) and I started to wonder about the implications of
> derivation by restriction.
> 
> What I'm looking for is whether the impedance of Der. by Rest. on OO
> apps/representations has been considered by anyone before...(not a
> basic description of how derivation works,Nikita.But thanks).

I think the main point here is that derivation in 
object orientation means specialization. So if B is 
a subclass of A, you can replace any occurence of A 
by B. If you specialize B by restriction, that does 
not hurt object orientation as long a any instance of 
B is still a valid instance of A, too.

This principle would be violated if you "restrict" B 
that a subelement required in A is not required in B. 
In fact, that would not be a specialization or 
restriction but a generalization. If I read the specs 
right, you are not allowed to widen the [minOccurs...
maxOccurs] interval, so the problem you address seems 
not exist.

Best regards

Stefan

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
Unsubscribe by posting to majordom@ic.ac.uk the message
unsubscribe xml-dev  (or)
unsubscribe xml-dev your-subscribed-email@your-subscribed-address

Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.