2090 2005-09-09 03:34:10 +0000 R-100: Issue re: description of overlapping for UPA, Appendix H 2009-04-21 19:24:59 +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 5988 0 sandygao 2005-09-09 03:34:10 +0000 The definition of overlapping in appendix H states: "They are both element declaration particles one of which is in the other's substitution group." Shouldn't it state: "They are both element declaration particles one of which has the same name and target namespace as an element declaration in the other's substitution group." Consider the following declarations: <element name="e1"/> <element name="e2" substitutionGroup="e1"/> <choice> <element ref="e1"/> <element name="e2" form="qualified"/> </choice> "e2" in the choice is not in the substitution group of "e1" (because "e2" is locally declared). But the example above still violates UPA, because for an element "e2", we don't know which particle to use for validation. See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001OctDec/0126.html 5989 1 sandygao 2005-09-09 03:34:44 +0000 Henry's response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001OctDec/0128.html Resolution: Discussed at the Feb. 7 concall: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Feb/0017.html The WG agrees with the commentator's proposed changes. Henry to draft erratum. Draft errata posted at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Oct/0201.html Discussed and approved with an ammendment, at Oct. f2f. See: http://www.w3.org/XML/2002/10/xml-schema-ftf-minutes Erratum E1-31 added