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 2842 - RQ-134 Origin of inherited portions of content model (scd-origin-inheritance)
Summary: RQ-134 Origin of inherited portions of content model (scd-origin-inheritance)
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: Other All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
Whiteboard: clarification cluster (need to recove...
Keywords: resolved
Depends on:
Reported: 2006-02-11 01:42 UTC by C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Modified: 2008-02-08 23:24 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Description C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2006-02-11 01:42:20 UTC
This issue was originally reported by Asir Vedamuthu, Mary Holstege.

Today, there is no mechanism to trace back the origin of some of the
components that were assembled via compiling a complex/simple type
definition.  Suppose one type extends another type by adding
additional terms to a sequence. In the schema component model there is
no direct way to determine which terms in the sequence come from the
base type: the inheritance is "compiled out" as it were.

How does this issue apply to Simple Type Definition? via Simple Type
Definition.{facets} property. This property is a union of the set of
Facets components resolved to by the facet [children] merged with
{facets} from {base type definition}, subject ..


See also

This item was classified as Req in the meeting of 2004-03-11

This item was discussed, and phase-1 agreement was reached, in the
meeting of 2004-04-02

According to the requirements document, phase-1 agreement has been reached.
Comment 1 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2006-09-19 19:39:34 UTC
See also bug 2195, which appears to be a duplicate of this one.
Comment 2 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2006-12-22 17:28:18 UTC
On 22 December, the WG concluded that the answer to this issue is
'content model particles are reused, not copied, and ditto for 
facets'.  See bug 2195.

Comment 3 David Ezell 2007-10-30 19:46:55 UTC
Bug was previously closed, but requires clarification and is therefore being reopened.

ACTION 2006-12-22.6: editors to find a good place for a note clarifying the status quo portions addressed in 2842.
Comment 4 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2008-02-08 02:23:25 UTC
A wording proposal including changes relevant to this issue (among
other things) went to the WG 4 Feb 2008:

(member-only link). Accordingly, I'm changing the status keyword.
Comment 5 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2008-02-08 23:24:46 UTC
During its telcon today, the XML Schema WG accepted the 'Structures
Omnibus 2' proposal, which includes changes intended to resolve this
issue.  (Or, for some issues, contains the editors' proposal that the
issue should be closed without further changes.) (member-only link)

Accordingly, I'm marking the issue resolved.

The originator of this issue (or in some cases the individual,
acting on behalf of a group, who filed the comment) should receive 
an email notification of this change.

Please examine the changes and let us know if you agree with this
resolution of your issue, by adding a comment to the issue record and
changing the Status of the issue to Closed. Or, if you do not agree
with this resolution, please add a comment explaining why. If you wish
to appeal the WG's decision to the Director, then also change the
Status of the record to Reopened. If you wish to record your dissent,
but do not wish to appeal the decision to the Director, then change
the Status of the record to Closed. If we do not hear from you in the
next two weeks, we will assume you agree with the WG decision.