[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: XML Schemas: ref'ing versus in-lining

• From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)
• To: "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@h...>
• Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 20:30:13 +0100

"Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@h...> writes:

> <snip/>

Everything above here is fine.

> "Locally scoped attribute and element declarations are special with
> regard to symbol spaces. Every complex type definition defines its
> own local attribute and element declaration symbol spaces, where
> these symbol spaces are distinct from each other and from any of the
> other symbol spaces."
> 
> This statement makes:
> 
>      <element name="foo"> 
>         <complexType>
>            <element name="bar" type="string"/>
>            <element name="bar" type="string"/>
>         </complexType>
>      </element>
> 
> illegal (regardless of the value of type) since you have duplicate
> declarations of the same element name within the same symbol space.
> Though it is concievable that you could have sub-symbol spaces
> within a complex type (a symbol space for each group, for example)
> and intra-complex type references to locally-scoped elements, I
> can't see that as being justified at this point.

A misunderstanding on your part: this is specifically allowed, because
there is in fact only one tag-type binding in this local context.  In
other words, the value of type _does_ matter.

ht
-- 
  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
          W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team
     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
	    Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@c...
		     URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML Schemas: ref'ing versus in-lining
    • From: Curt Arnold <CurtA@t...>

• References:
  • RE: XML Schemas: ref'ing versus in-lining
    • From: "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@h...>

• Prev by Date: Multiply Defined Elements (was: Re: XML Schemas: ref'ing versusin-lining)
• Next by Date: Re: Multiply Defined Elements (was: Re: XML Schemas: ref'ing versusin-lining)
• Previous by thread: Re: Multiply Defined Elements (was: Re: XML Schemas: ref'ing versusin-lining)
• Next by thread: Re: XML Schemas: ref'ing versus in-lining
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread