DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27882>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27882

incorrect validation of restrictions of any





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-03-24 22:20 -------
Hmm. I think you're right. The phrase "the particle within which this <sequence>
appears" is kind of ambiguous...by your interpretation it should be more
precisely worded as "the particle of which this <sequence> is the {term}"
whereas I was reading it be speaking at level of relationships between schema
components and and not at the level of the relationships between properties and
schema components. 

There a few places in the spec where it encourages the loose equation "sequence
IS a particle" like the table of restriction rules with "base particle" and
"derived particle" as axes listing "sequence" among the particles (it doesn't
list the axes as "base particle term" and "derived particle term"). 

I seem to recall reading some comment from the Xerces group that in the cases
where the spec is ambiguous Xerces was following the what seemed to be "spirit"
of the spec... (I wish I could find that again). Is this one of those cases, I
wonder?

This being the case, I seem be running into what is addressed in 2.4.1.1 of the
Requirements for XML Schema 1.1.  Arg!

http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-xmlschema-11-req-20030121/#N40014C

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to