"Martin Thomson" <martin.thomson@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> For example:
>
> Top = (x : anyType, ##any)
> Middle = (x : string, y : anyType)
> Bottom = (x : string, y : string)
Right, on the proposed 1.1 story, that's not allowed _unless_ y is
declared at the top-level with anyType.
> However, element y cannot be declared globally, as required by "strict"
> because its type cannot then be restricted as shown.
Why not? Restricting top-level with local is allowed.
Instances which look like this
<top><x>...</x><y>...</y></top>
will be validated with y : anyType, not y : string, but I don't see
what else you expect. You can always do
<top xsi:type="BottomType"><x>...</x><y>...</y></top>
> For my own understanding, what benefit does this change provide?
Make what it says at the beginning of the 1.0 REC actually true :-).
"Members of a type, A, whose definition is a ·restriction· of the
definition of another type, B, are always members of type B as
well."
That invariant in turn makes processing schema-validated material to
make important assumptions based on the types assigned to items in the
infoset.
ht
--
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
Half-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@xxxxxxxxxxxx
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
|
