Re: A question about XML-Schema

[Murali Mani <mani@CS.UCLA.EDU>]

Thanks -- so restriction is transitive.
But at this time, I sincerely do not see why upa should have anything to
do with it -- they seem quite orthogonal -- and any subtyping *should* be
defined *always* in such a way that transitivity holds -- I will check up
sometime soon.

<warning>speaking for himself only</warning>

thanks and regards - murali.

On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Henry S. Thompson wrote:

> > Is restriction in xml-schema transitive?? -- in other words, if a type
> > Type_B is obtained by restriction from Type_A, and Type_C is obtained by
> > restriction from Type_B, then is the following statement true: "Type_C can
> > always be obtained by restriction from Type_A"
>
> It's true, because of the Unique Particle Attribution constraint.
>
> ht
> --
>   Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
>           W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team
>      2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
> 	    Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
> 		     URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org, an initiative of OASIS
> <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> "unsubscribe" in the body to: xml-dev-request@lists.xml.org
>