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 5639 - when is value V a valid restriction of value Y?
Summary: when is value V a valid restriction of value Y?
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: Macintosh All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard: datatypes cluster
Keywords: resolved
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2008-04-12 03:30 UTC by C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Modified: 2008-10-08 15:46 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2008-04-12 03:30:37 UTC
3.16.6.2 Derivation Valid (Restriction, Simple) appeals several
times to the notion of "valid restriction", e.g. clause 1.3.2 
"... the DF's {value} is a valid restriction of BF's {value} 
as defined in [XML Schema: Datatypes]."

Datatypes does not define the notion of one value being a 
valid restriction of another value in isolation; it defines
a number of constraints called "length valid restriction" and
"whitespace valid restriction" and so on.  The reference
from Structures needs to make clearer what is going on and what
parts of Datatypes are being appealed to.  Datatypes may also
need to define a more useful term for the required relation
on facet/value pairs.
Comment 1 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2008-04-12 03:31:17 UTC
[For the record, I should record the editors' thanks to Michael Kay for
pointing out this problem in private email.]
Comment 2 Sandy Gao 2008-10-08 15:46:21 UTC
On 2008-09-26, the working group adopted a proposal to address this issue by replacing the problematic phrases with references to the appropriate constraints and sections defined in Part 2 Datatypes. In particular, refer to constraint "Applicable Facets" to make sure facets are allowed, and refer to section "Constraining Facets" to make sure facet values are valid.

The proposal (along with changes for other bugs) can be found at (member-only):
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.editorial0809.html