[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
FYI, The Schema WG recently resolved to issue a clarification with erratum
saying that a base type can be anySimpleType only for the XML Schema
datatypes, making the sForS valid, but other attempts to derive from
anySimpleType invalid.
xan
-----Original Message-----
From: Dare Obasanjo [mailto:dareo@microsoft.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 1:10 PM
To: John Verhaeg; Henry S. Thompson
Cc: peej@mindspring.com; xml-dev@lists.xml.org; xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] (more details) embedding xml schema in an
instance doc
Exactly. So either the sForS is invalid (which wouldn't matter if it
wasn't a normative reference) or there needs to be acknowledgement in
the W3C XML Schema recommendation that the sForS should be special cased
by validating processors. Either way, the issue is not clear cut.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Verhaeg [mailto:jverhaeg@metamatrix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 9:43 AM
> To: Dare Obasanjo; Henry S. Thompson
> Cc: peej@mindspring.com; xml-dev@lists.xml.org; xmlschema-dev@w3.org
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] (more details) embedding xml schema in
> an instance doc
>
> It seems like section 3.14.6, "Schema Component Constraint:
> Type Derivation OK (Simple)", of XML Schema Structures Part 1
> doesn't allow for atomic restrictions, which of course the
> sForS must do, so it would seem there would have to be a
> special case for it.
>
> John P. A. Verhaeg
|
