xml-dev - Re: EquivClass & Derived Type

[Stefan Haustein <haustein@kimo.cs.uni-dortmund.de>]

Michael Anderson wrote:

> Thanks for all the replies to my previous questions on equivClass.  I
> now have a new problem based on my new understanding.  At the moment
> there exists equivClass and derived type, but I do not see why both are
> necessary as derived type could do the same job.

I do not see the need, too. You can find several messages
about this by looking at the thread "Schema concepts"

> By separating equivalence from inheritance, are we saying that even
> elements of the same type or subtypes of the same type are not
> necessarily substitutable by one another in every context.  For
> instance, even if elements "name" and "account number" are both of type
> string, they could not be used in place of one another in most context.
> Is this the main reason behind the separation of inheritance and
> equivalence?

"String" is a data type, so name and account number would
not be of the same element type, and the problem would
not exist. Also, you could allways hinder substitution 
by deriving a new element locally.

Best regards

Stefan

-- 
Stefan Haustein
University of Dortmund
Computer Science VIII
www-ai.cs.uni-dortmund.de

***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/threads.html
***************************************************************************