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 6685 - Appendix I Checking content-type restriction References Not Available
Summary: Appendix I Checking content-type restriction References Not Available
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
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: David Ezell
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: editorial, resolved
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-03-11 14:35 UTC by Kevin Braun
Modified: 2009-03-16 13:47 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description Kevin Braun 2009-03-11 14:35:34 UTC
Of the several links for the references in Appendix I, "Checking content-type restriction", the only one I found to work was http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/XML_Europe_2003.html.  The rest led to http://www.idealliance.org/not_found.
Comment 1 Sandy Gao 2009-03-16 13:47:01 UTC
During its 2009-03-13 telecon, the schema WG adopted a proposal to address this issue.

The proposal can be found at (member-only):
  http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.omni.20090313.html

Changes include:
1. Removd Appendix I, because the referenced papers no longer match the current "content model restriction" requirements (with the introduction of weakened wildcard, open content, related <all> groups, etc.)
2. Removed the affected references
3. Removed the reference to appendix I from "Content type restricts (Complex Content)"
4. Removed the reference to appendix I from the "redefine" rules. Note that the proposal referenced above has more changes to "redefine". The WG decided to not make them as part of this bug. The fix to "redefine" is just to remove the second sentence (the reference to Appendix I).

With these changes, the WG believes that the issue raised in this bug report is fully addressed. I'm marking this RESOLVED accordingly.

Kevin, as the persons who opened and reopened this issue, if you would indicate your concurrence with or dissent from the WG's disposition of the comment by closing or reopening the issue, we'll be grateful. If we don't hear from you in the next two weeks, we'll assume that silence implies consent.