• From: Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI <kohsukekawaguchi@y...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:07:36 -0700

> Notice that the restriction has no content. If this is valid, then is the
> intent to just extend the "base64Binary" builtin type? Or assign a different
> name to the "base64Binary" builtin type? I thought <restriction> was
> intended to restrict a new datatype to a *subset* of an existing type?

I suppose CryptoBinary can still be considered as a restriction of base64Binary.
In other words, it's not an alias, although it behaves like that to some
extent.

I don't see anything in the spec that contradicts my interpretation.


In mathematics, if A=B, then one can usually say that A is a subset of B.
To exclude that possibility, one has to say that A is a proper subset of
B.




regards,
----------------------
K.Kawaguchi
E-Mail: kohsukekawaguchi@y...

• References:
  • XML Schema ?
    • From: "Gregory M. Messner" <gmessner@b...>

• Prev by Date: can dtds be extended?
• Next by Date: Re: http://xml.org/sax/properties/xml-string
• Previous by thread: XML Schema ?
• Next by thread: OASIS TC Call For Participation: UBL
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread