RE: abstract elements and xsi:type substitution

I can not comment on the *intent*, because the relative clauses existed 
before I joined the schema WG. FWIW, I have raised a similar issue and 
proposed a solution [1].

[1] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2005JanMar/0033.html

Thanks,
Sandy Gao
XML Parser Development, IBM Canada
(1-905) 413-3255
sandygao@ca.ibm.com


xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org wrote on 01/12/2006 05:15:07 PM:

> Currently both system.xml and MSXML go through the 1.2 clause and 
> accept the xml instance as valid.  We had a few discussions on this 
> along the lines of Michael?s response and some of us think that the 
_intent
> _ of the spec was not to allow abstract elements in the instance 
> documents regardless of xsi:type (as Sandy commented).  So we wanted
> to see what others thought.
> 
> Anybody else wants to comment on the _intent_ of the spec?
> 
> Stan
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Stan Kitsis,
> Webdata - XML
> Microsoft Corporation
> --------------------------------------