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 2663 - wd-1: "constructed from ID" vs. "derived from ID" in Structures
Summary: wd-1: "constructed from ID" vs. "derived from ID" in Structures
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: PC Windows 2000
: P4 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard: medium, hard
Keywords: needsAgreement
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-01-05 20:13 UTC by Mary Holstege
Modified: 2006-11-22 05:19 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:

Attachments

Description Mary Holstege 2006-01-05 20:13:51 UTC 
I noticed that many occurrences of "derived from ID" (similarly IDREF/IDREFS) 
are replaced with "constructed from ID". Is this a conscious decision we have 
made?

In 1.0, only those types that are derived from ID/IDREF/IDREFS by restriction 
are considered ID/IDREF/IDREFS types. If we use "constructed" instead, it means 
that lists and unions of these types are also treated specially. Don't remember 
we've made a decision here. Maybe I missed something.

As section 2.2.1.1 mentions, one of 2 entities is used to replace the old 
"derived". Shouldn't the &derived; one be used instead of the &constructed; one 
for these cases?

raised on 25 Jun 2004 by Sandy Gao
Comment 1 Sandy Gao 2006-11-22 05:19:23 UTC 
Proposal: only add a value to ID/IDREF table when it's actually validated using
ID/IDREF or a type derived from them.

Resolution: adopted at 2006-10-17 telecon.