5467 2008-02-08 20:12:42 +0000 3.3.1 incorrect use of "respectively" (editorial) 2008-02-08 20:17:17 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Structures: XSD Part 1 1.0 only All All NEW http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-1-20041028/#Element_Declaration_details P4 minor --- 3889 1 cmsmcq cmsmcq dsb www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 18915 0 cmsmcq 2008-02-08 20:12:42 +0000 +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #3889, to allow the issue to be tracked separately for XSD 1.0 and 1.1 +++ Regarding _XML_Schema_Part_1:_Structures_Second_Edition at http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-1-20041028/: In section 3.3.1, the specification says: The explicit values of {substitution group exclusions} rule out element declarations having types which are extensions or restrictions respectively of {type definition}. The use of "respectively" appears to be broken (incorrect). The sentence does not contain any words identifying the pair of things that "extensions" and "restrictions" correspond to respectively (i.e., according to their order in the sentence). ("Respectively" needs to be used with at least two pairs, as in "hot" and "cold" refer to temperatures that are higher and lower, respectively.) 18916 1 cmsmcq 2008-02-08 20:17:17 +0000 Adding Daniel Barclay to the CC list, as the originator of bug 3889, of which this is a clone.