This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
I'm not sure if I'm wright with my interpretation of clause 3 of derivation-ok-restriction. In special the following sentence: "...and for every attribute information item A in E.[attributes], B's default binding for A subsumes that defined by T." As I read it the following complex type is invalid: <xs:complexType name="T"> <xs:anyAttribute namespace="##any" processContents="skip"/> </xs:complexType> In this case the base type definition B would be xs:anyType and T would be the complex type T. The default binding for any potential attribute information item would be skip for T and lax for B (xs:anyType has a lax attribute wildcard). So B's default binding for A (lax) will not subsume T's default binding for A (skip).
WG agrees that clause 4.3 of XML Schema 1.0 2e did handle this situation. We are researching the change history to find the motivation for the change. See: RQ17a1, adopted 8 December 2006.