CZ-0001 through CZ-0012 in the Part1 FPDAM proposed disposition documents

Jirka Kosek jirka at
Thu Jan 7 21:29:32 CET 2010

MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) wrote:

>> OTOH if both S and T are generated from one "merged" schema then you
>> have to add only one simple additional step to turn singleton unions
>> into xs:restriction.
> But the small step is dedicated to this one particular case, and bunch
> of such similar small steps would be needed.  My action item will
> certainly become more difficult.  I would welcome other volunteers.

In past I have been involved in several projects that involved quite
massive automated schema processing and refactoring. Although my time is
limited (whose isn't? ;-) I'm happy to help you with developing system
for maintaining and generating schemas.

> Is the current design very unreadable?  It may look strange if you
> consider the strict schema only, but it makes the differences between 
> S and T very understandable.  Frankly, I do not see big advantages in
> your proposal.  

Maybe it is only nitpicking but having union of single type is wrong in
XML schema IMHO. It is of course purely OK in algebra or you can do such
things in schema languages like RELAX NG where schema is composed from
patterns which are then "normalized/simplified" and such excessive
artifacts are lost during this process.

But XML schema doesn't have such mechanism and union of single type is
not the same as this single type alone. This can make OOXML object model
more complex in databinding tools.


  Jirka Kosek      e-mail: jirka at
       Professional XML consulting and training services
  DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
 OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 member

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 259 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the sc34wg4 mailing list