6190 2008-10-29 22:13:46 +0000 Multiple Attribute Wildcards 2008-10-29 22:14:07 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Structures: XSD Part 1 1.0/1.1 both PC Windows XP RESOLVED WORKSFORME P2 normal --- 1 David_E3 cmsmcq www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 22284 0 David_E3 2008-10-29 22:13:46 +0000 The WG explored an answer to the questions at the face to face meeting. Michael Kay sent several emails outlining the issue: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2008Oct/0009.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2008Oct/0014.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2008Oct/0015.html From the IRC log: <MSM> The WG discussed this issue at some length during the ftf today. <MSM> There was some sympathy for the premise of the issue report, that <MSM> union is a more natural operation in the situations mentioned. <MSM> Further examination persuaded us that (a) references to two different <MSM> attribute groups with different wildcards uses intersection, extension <MSM> uses union with the base, and (b) sometimes union is the natural <MSM> operation, and sometimes intersection is the natural operation (see <MSM> minutes of the meeting for examples with terse commentary). <MSM> Eventually we lost confidence that making the change proposed here <MSM> would actually produce more reliably useful results. <MSM> Since there is no logical contradiction here, but instead at most an <MSM> unexpected feature of the design, we decided to close this as <MSM> WORKSFORME before we remembered that no Bugzilla record has been <MSM> opened for this question. We are creating this issue so that we can close it, but track it properly.