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 6190 - Multiple Attribute Wildcards
Summary: Multiple Attribute Wildcards
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.0/1.1 both
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-10-29 22:13 UTC by David Ezell
Modified: 2008-10-29 22:14 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description David Ezell 2008-10-29 22:13:46 UTC
The WG explored an answer to the questions at the face to face meeting.

Michael Kay sent several emails outlining the issue:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2008Oct/0009.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2008Oct/0014.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2008Oct/0015.html

From the IRC log:
<MSM> The WG discussed this issue at some length during the ftf today.
<MSM> There was some sympathy for the premise of the issue report, that
<MSM> union is a more natural operation in the situations mentioned.
<MSM> Further examination persuaded us that (a) references to two different
<MSM> attribute groups with different wildcards uses intersection, extension
<MSM> uses union with the base, and (b) sometimes union is the natural
<MSM> operation, and sometimes intersection is the natural operation (see
<MSM> minutes of the meeting for examples with terse commentary).
<MSM> Eventually we lost confidence that making the change proposed here
<MSM> would actually produce more reliably useful results.  
<MSM> Since there is no logical contradiction here, but instead at most an
<MSM> unexpected feature of the design, we decided to close this as
<MSM> WORKSFORME before we remembered that no Bugzilla record has been
<MSM> opened for this question.  

We are creating this issue so that we can close it, but track it properly.