2663 2006-01-05 20:13:51 +0000 wd-1: "constructed from ID" vs. "derived from ID" in Structures 2006-11-22 05:19:23 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Structures: XSD Part 1 1.1 only PC Windows 2000 RESOLVED FIXED medium, hard needsAgreement P4 normal --- 1 holstege cmsmcq www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 7652 0 holstege 2006-01-05 20:13:51 +0000 I noticed that many occurrences of "derived from ID" (similarly IDREF/IDREFS) are replaced with "constructed from ID". Is this a conscious decision we have made? In 1.0, only those types that are derived from ID/IDREF/IDREFS by restriction are considered ID/IDREF/IDREFS types. If we use "constructed" instead, it means that lists and unions of these types are also treated specially. Don't remember we've made a decision here. Maybe I missed something. As section 2.2.1.1 mentions, one of 2 entities is used to replace the old "derived". Shouldn't the &derived; one be used instead of the &constructed; one for these cases? raised on 25 Jun 2004 by Sandy Gao 12994 1 sandygao 2006-11-22 05:19:23 +0000 Proposal: only add a value to ID/IDREF table when it's actually validated using ID/IDREF or a type derived from them. Resolution: adopted at 2006-10-17 telecon.