This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 15853 - Wrong derivation direction in Default binding subsumes
Summary: Wrong derivation direction in Default binding subsumes
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: All All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: David Ezell
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: editorial, resolved
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2012-02-02 10:45 UTC by Andreas Meissl
Modified: 2012-03-30 08:50 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description Andreas Meissl 2012-02-02 10:45:29 UTC 
I think clause 5.1 of the Definition: "A default binding G (for general) subsumes another default binding S (for specific)..."

should read:

"S.{attribute declaration}.{type definition} is validly derived from G.{attribute declaration}.{type definition}, as defined in Type Derivation OK (Simple) (ยง3.16.6.3)."

The specific simple type definition should be validly derived from the general one and not the other way round.
Comment 1 Michael Kay 2012-02-03 17:12:59 UTC 
Note, the section in question is 3.4.6.4 Content Type Restricts (Complex Content)
Comment 2 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2012-02-25 02:07:41 UTC 
A wording proposal intended to resolve this issue (and some others) is now at 

  https://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.ep35.html
  (member-only link)

So I'm marking this issue as needsReview.
Comment 3 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2012-03-30 01:12:41 UTC 
The proposal mentioned in comment 2 was adopted by the WG on 8 March and has been integrated into the WG's working copy of the status-quo text.  Accordingly, I'm marking the issue as resolved.

Andreas Meissl, you should get a copy of this comment by email.  As the originator of the bug report, we ask that you indicate your assent to the WG's resolution of the issue by closing the bug.  If for some reason you are not happy with the WG's resolution of the issue, please re-open the bug report and explain what's wrong.  If we don't hear from you we'll assume you are content, given that the change adopted is precisely the one you proposed.  Thank you for your attention to the spec!