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 4002 - 3.3.6 ref. to non-existent {prohibited substitutions} of element declaration
Summary: 3.3.6 ref. to non-existent {prohibited substitutions} of element declaration
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.0 only
Hardware: All Windows 3.1
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: David Ezell
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on: 3890
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2006-11-22 05:28 UTC by Sandy Gao
Modified: 2012-12-04 00:51 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description Sandy Gao 2006-11-22 05:28:37 UTC
Regarding _XML_Schema_Part_1:_Structures_Second_Edition at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-1-20041028/:


Section 3.3.6 refers to the {prohibited substitutions} property of an
element declaration:

  Schema Component Constraint: Substitution Group OK (Transitive)
    ... [an] element declaration (call it C) ...
      ...
      2.3 ... C's {prohibited substitutions} (if C is complex ...) ...

However, an element declaration has no {prohibited substitutions} property.
(Element declarations have {disallowed substitution}; complex type
definitions have {prohibited substitutions}.)

Evidentally, that text was supposed to read either:

  ... C's {type definition}'s {prohibited substitutions} ...

or

  ... C's {disallowed substitutions} ...

It seems that the former is the intended meaning (since C's {prohibited
substitutions} value is "passed in" as the blocking constraint when the
"Substitution Group OK (Transitive)" rule is invoked from the "Element
Sequence Locally Valid (Particle)" rule).


Also, where it says "if C is complex," shouldn't that be "if C's {type
definition} is complex"?