This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Does the following choice violate UPA? <group name="grp"> <sequence> <element name="e"/> </sequence> </group> <choice> <group ref="grp"/> <group ref="grp" maxOccurs="3"/> </choice> "Schema Component Constraint: Unique Particle Attribution" states: A content model must be formed such that during validation of an element information item sequence, the particle contained directly, indirectly or implicitly therein with which to attempt to validate each item in the sequence in turn can be uniquely determined without examining the content or attributes of that item, and without any information about the items in the remainder of the sequence. In the constraint above, what does "particle ... can be uniquely determined" mean? See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001OctDec/0072.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001OctDec/0073.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001OctDec/0074.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001OctDec/0075.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001OctDec/0076.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001OctDec/0077.html Resolution: Discussed at the Feb. 7 concall: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Feb/0017.html The WG resolved that the example given does violate UPA, and the text quoted merits clarification. Henry to propose erratum. Proposed erratum: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema- ig/2002Oct/att-0313/01-R-101etc.html Erratum reviewed/approved at the Nov. 1 telecon. E1-29 added.
*** Bug 2076 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***