2025 2005-09-07 20:29:17 +0000 R-047: Request for clarification of complex type derivation restriction rules for empty base 2009-04-21 19:24:52 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Structures: XSD Part 1 1.0 only All All CLOSED FIXED P2 normal --- 1 sandygao ht www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 5839 0 sandygao 2005-09-07 20:29:17 +0000 Constraint 5.3 of "Schema Component Constraint: Derivation Valid (Restriction, Complex)" states: "5.3 If the {content type} of the {base type definition} is mixed or the {content type} of the complex type definition itself is element-only, then the particle of the complex type definition itself must be a valid restriction of the particle of the {content type} of the {base type definition} as defined in Particle Valid (Restriction)." Does the use of the definite article in the phrase "the particle of the {content type} of the {base type definition}" imply that the {content type} must have a particle, and must not be empty? If not, what prohobits the following: <xs:complexType name="rrr" /> <xs:complexType name="sss"> <xs:complexContent> <xs:restriction base="rrr"> <xs:sequence> <xs:element name="dummy"/> </xs:sequence> </xs:restriction> </xs:complexContent> </xs:complexType> See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JulSep/0081.html 5840 1 sandygao 2005-09-07 20:29:43 +0000 Tentative resolution: http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2001/10/xml-schema-ftf-minutes#ab1b3b3b3b1b3 Resolution The WG approved the tentative resolution above. An erratum will be created clarifying that the example is in error not because of constraint 5.3, but because of failure to match particles in one against the other. Proposed erratum available at: http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2002/09/xmlschema-1/structures-with- errata.html#derivation-ok-restriction Sept. 20: RESOLVED: to accept E1-17 as amended (s/from a/by restricting a/). Erratum E1-15 added.