Thanks Michel.

Shouldn't openContent be in there?

/Roger


> -----Original Message-----
> From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen [mailto:cmsmcq@b...] 
> Sent: Friday, July 03, 2009 11:03 AM
> To: Costello, Roger L.
> Cc: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen; xmlschema-dev@w...
> Subject: Re: [XML Schema 1.1] The <restriction> element is 
> not declared in the DTD for XML Schema 1.1
> 
> 
> On 3 Jul 2009, at 06:35 , Costello, Roger L. wrote:
> 
> >
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > In the datatypes specification I see the ELEMENT 
> declaration for the  
> > restriction element used in simpleTypes.
> >
> > But I don't see in the structures specification a declaration for  
> > the restriction element used in derive-by-restriction.
> >
> > They shouldn't be declared the same way, right?
> 
> DTDs don't have context-dependent declarations (or 'local
> GI - declaration bindings' if one prefers to think of it
> that way).  So (as the comment immediately following the
> declaration in datatypes.dtd mentions) the same declaration
> must handle both simple type restriction and complex
> type restriction.
> 
> > Can you provide me the declaration for the restriction 
> element used  
> > in derive-by-restriction? I want to incorporate it into the 
> tutorial  
> > I am creating.
> 
> 
> The declaration reads
> 
>      <!ELEMENT %restriction; ((%annotation;)?,
>                               (%restriction1; |
>                                ((%simpleType;)?,(%facet;)*)),
>                               (%attrDecls;))>
> 
> Expanding the parameter entities for the generic identifiers
> (aka 'element type names') of the elements, assuming
> a namespace prefix of xsd, and removing some now-extraneous
> parentheses, this is
> 
>      <!ELEMENT xsd:restriction (xsd:annotation?,
>                                 (%restriction1; |
>                                  (xsd:simpleType?, xsd:facet*)
>                                 ),
>                                 (%attrDecls;))>
> 
> The parameter entities attrDecls and restriction1 are
> declared in XMLSchema.dtd.  Expanding them to get the effective
> declaration of the restrction element, and reformatting to
> make the structure a little easier to read, yields:
> 
>      <!ELEMENT xsd:restriction
>          ( xsd:annotation?,
>            (
>              (xsd:all | xsd:choice | xsd:sequence | xsd:group)?
>            |
>              (xsd:simpleType?, xsd:facet*)
>            ),
>            (xsd:attribute | xsd:attributeGroup)*,
>            xsd:anyAttribute?
>          )>
> 
> I hope this helps.  If you want to have a DTD formulation
> of the content model used when restriction is a child of
> complexContent, you'll need to eliminate the simpleType
> branch (or transcribe a content model from the schema for
> schema documents), which I will leave as an exercise for
> the reader.
> 
> -- 
> ****************************************************************
> * C. M. Sperberg-McQueen, Black Mesa Technologies LLC
> * http://www.blackmesatech.com
> * http://cmsmcq.com/mib
> * http://balisage.net
> ****************************************************************
> 
> 
> 
> 
>