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 8458 - <alternative> not explicitly identified as absent in reference to global element
Summary: <alternative> not explicitly identified as absent in reference to global element
Status: CLOSED 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 minor
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: David Ezell
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: resolved
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-12-08 15:07 UTC by Kevin Braun
Modified: 2010-11-10 17:45 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description Kevin Braun 2009-12-08 15:07:28 UTC
In section 3.3.3, step 2.2 reads:
 If ref is present, then all of <complexType>, <simpleType>, <key>, <keyref>,
 <unique>, nillable, default, fixed, form, block and type are absent, i.e. only
 minOccurs, maxOccurs, id and <annotation> are allowed to appear together with
 ref.

It should probably mention <alternative> and read:
 If ref is present, then all of <complexType>, <simpleType>, <alternative>,
 <key>, <keyref>, <unique>, nillable, default, fixed, form, block and type are
 absent, i.e. only minOccurs, maxOccurs, id and <annotation> are allowed to
 appear together with ref.

At least, I think that is the intention.
Comment 1 David Ezell 2009-12-11 16:54:12 UTC
The WG decided this issue, to replace the errant text with the following:

If ref is present, then no unqualified attributes are present other
than minOccurs, maxOccurs, and id, and no children in the Schema
namespace other than <annotation>.
Comment 2 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2010-08-16 16:47:20 UTC
The text given in comment 1 has now been integrated into the status quo document at

  http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.html#sec-src-element
  (member-only link)

Accordingly, I'm marking this issue as resolved.  Kevin Braun, as the originator of the bug report, you are invited to indicate either that you are happy with the resolution of the issue (by changing the bug's status to CLOSED) or else that you are not happy (by reopening it and explaining what's wrong).  if we don't hear from you in two weeks, the WG will assume you are happy.
Comment 3 David Ezell 2010-11-10 17:45:09 UTC
The WG reported this bug as FIXED on 2010-08-16.  We are closing this bug
as requiring no futher work.  If there are issues remaining, you can reopen
this bug and enter a comment to indicate the problem.  Thanks very much for the
feedback.