This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
In the "changes since 1.0", we have the following description: "The constraint Element Declarations Consistent (ยง3.8.6.3) has been revised to require more consistency in type assignment when elements with the same expanded name may match both a local element declaration and a wildcard in the same content model. XSD 1.0 allows such content models even if there is a discrepancy between the type assigned to elements by the local element declarations and by the top-level element declaration which will govern elements which match the wildcard. For compatibility reasons, such content models are still allowed, but any element instance which matches the wildcard is required to have a governing type definition compatible with the type assigned by the local element declarations matched by the element's expanded name." This seems misleading to me. From what I can tell, the "is required" of the last sentence is not part of 3.8.6.3 (as implied), but is handled by step 5 of 3.4.4.2 Element Locally Valid (Complex Type) (which I discovered thanks to the discussion in bug 5940). The change to 3.8.6.3 seems to focus on type consistency when conditional type assignment is being used, but you'd never get that from the discussion above. 3.4.4.2 Element Locally Valid (Complex Type) is mentioned in the "changes since" appendix when discussing validation rules for conditional types, while 3.8.6.3 Element Declarations Consistent isn't mentioned. Isn't that somewhat backwards? 3.8.6.3 seems to be specifically targeted to conditional types, while 3.4.4.2 aims for a more general type consistency.
From the telcon: Editors to take a closer look, and improve (make less misleading) if possible.
A wording proposal intended to resolve this issue (and two others) has been prepared by the editors and is now on the W3C server at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.b7787.html (member-only link)
On the telcon
The wording proposal mentioned in comment 2 and adopted today (as noted in comment 3) has now been integrated into the status-quo drafts at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.html http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.diff-1.0.html http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.diff-wd.html (member-only links) Accordingly, I'm marking this issue 'resolved'. Bugzilla should send a notice of this status change to Kevin Braun, as the originator of the issue. It would be helpful if you could review the wording change (I believe you have member access to the W3C site; correct this misapprehansion if you don't), and indicate by closing (or reopening) the issue whether you are satisfied with the disposition of the comment or not. If we don't hear from you in the next two weeks, we'll assume you are happy. Thank you in any case for the comment.
I think that H.1.9 point 1 (on conditional type assignment) would still benefit by having a reference to 3.8.6.3, since the new material in that constraint relates to conditional type assignment. However, I think H.1.6 point 1 is a good improvement and addresses the issue. If you don't see fit to add a reference to 3.8.6.3 as I noted above, it's fine with me for this to be closed. I'll leave it open in case you want to incorporate that.
The WG reported this bug as FIXED on 2009-10-19. We are closing this bug as requiring no futher work. If there are issues remaining, you can reopen this bug and enter a comment to indicate the problem. Thanks very much for the feedback.