• To: "Eddie Robertsson" <erobertsson@a...>
• Subject: RE: XML Schema to relaxNG xslt
• From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
• Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 18:49:59 -0700
• Cc: "John Cowan" <jcowan@r...>,"Rick Taylor" <taylor@p...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Thread-index: AcIbHHA0wN70HRz+T2Wft5BU1yj0HQAA9lcI
• Thread-topic: XML Schema to relaxNG xslt

-----Original Message----- 
From: Eddie Robertsson [mailto:erobertsson@a...] 
Sent: Sun 6/23/2002 6:28 PM 
To: Dare Obasanjo 
Cc: John Cowan; Rick Taylor; xml-dev@l... 
Subject: Re:  XML Schema to relaxNG xslt

>The above looks perfectly valid at
>a first glance but when you pick up the magnifier glass you will find
>that the base type has a required attribute "firstSubscribed" which is
>made optional in the derived type. This is not a valid restriction
>because you can never remove anything that is required in the base type.
>I'm not sure if this was a simple typo by Dare or if he wasn't aware
>that this was indeed an illegal derivation. 
 
It was a typo/mixup. The schema violated the "child validates a subset of what the parent can validate" informal rule that I use for remembering how to derivation by restriction works. I should have attempted to validate it instead of composing it inline. :)
 
>XML Spy4.4 and MSXML4 both (incorrectly) says the above type derivation is valid

Thanks for the heads up, I'll file a bug about this. 

 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML Schema to relaxNG xslt
    • From: Eddie Robertsson <erobertsson@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML Schema to relaxNG xslt
• Next by Date: Re: Re: XML Schema to relaxNG xslt
• Previous by thread: RE: XML Schema to relaxNG xslt
• Next by thread: Re: XML Schema to relaxNG xslt
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread