This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 2069 - R-079: Ambiguity in statements about valid type derivation
Summary: R-079: Ambiguity in statements about valid type derivation
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.0/1.1 both
Hardware: All All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard: thimble, easy, editorial cluster
Keywords: resolved
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-09-09 02:59 UTC by Sandy Gao
Modified: 2009-04-21 19:21 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:

Attachments

Description Sandy Gao 2005-09-09 02:59:49 UTC 
In various places in the Structures spec, statements like the following appear: 

"type definition A must be validly derived from type definition B given its 
{prohibited substitutions}, as defined in Type Derivation OK (Complex) 
(213.4.6) (if it is a complex type definition), or given the empty set, as 
defined in Type Derivation OK (Simple) (213.14.6) (if it is a simple type 
definition)." 

Questions: 

Which type does each reference of "it" refer to in the paragraph above? 
There is no constraint for the case where A is a simple type and B is a complex 
type; how do we check whether the type "string" is a valid derivation 
from "anyType"?

See bullet 2 from:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001OctDec/0049.html
Comment 1 Sandy Gao 2005-09-09 02:59:59 UTC 
The WG resolved to classify R-79 as an error, at the March 14 telecon
Comment 2 Sandy Gao 2007-05-25 13:30:47 UTC 
Discussed at 2007-05-18 telecon. Determined this issue also applies to schema 1.1, and it is an editorial issue. Marking it accordingly.
Comment 3 David Ezell 2008-01-25 21:31:30 UTC 
Fixed in the course of other revisions.