2056 2005-09-09 02:32:00 +0000 R-067: A question about type derivation and anonymous types 2009-04-21 19:24:55 +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 5920 0 sandygao 2005-09-09 02:32:00 +0000 Schema Component Constraint: Type Derivation OK (Simple) lists conditions under which a simple type D is considered to be validly derived from another simple type B. The first condition is: "1 They are the same type definition." Is possible for 2 anonymous simple type definitions to be considered "the same type definition"? See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2001Jun/0010.html 5921 1 sandygao 2005-09-09 02:32:41 +0000 Henry's response: No, but the REC isn't completely clear about this. Clause 1 above could probably usefully be changed to read "They are the same named type definition". See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2001Jun/0012.html Further email and thoughts from Henry: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2001Nov/0037.html Status 2002/01: Henry to propose a resolution/text. Status 2002/02: Proposed resolution and follow-on email from Henry: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Feb/0013.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Feb/0027.html 5922 2 sandygao 2005-09-09 02:33:20 +0000 Resolved at the Feb. f2f. Henry Thompson to draft erratum reflecting his original proposal (see above). And, the issue of identity and anonymous types should be considered for 1.1. Also, an example in the Primer needs to be modified. Primer erratum E0-21 added. Proposed text at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Oct/att-0221/00-R- 67etc.html Discussed and approved at Oct. 24 telecon http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Oct/0248.html Structures erratum E1-17 added