rspec/rules/S3857/xml/rule.adoc

== Why is this an issue?

Complex types can be restricted by means of an ``++xs:restriction++`` element. But ``++restriction++`` is anti-inheritance: the derived type has less information than the base type. Further, restriction causes the redefinition of the complex types elements and attributes, which leads to fragility in your XML schema; any change to a super type will require corresponding changes in all restricting subtypes, even those in other schemas. For example, if the base type defines a mandatory "color" element of type ``++xs:int++``, the restricting type must also define a "color" element whose type cannot be, say, ``++xs:string++``.


``++xs:extension++``, on the other hand, allows the extending element to inherit the base class' elements and add new ones.


=== Noncompliant code example

[source,xml]
----
<xs:complexType name="Fruit>
  <xs:sequence>
    <xs:element name="name" type="xs:string"/>
    <xs:element name="color" type="xs:string" minOccurs="0"/>
  </xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="UncoloredFruit">
  <xs:complexContent>
    <xs:restriction base="Fruit">  <!-- Noncompliant -->
      <xs:sequence>
        <xs:element name="name" type="xs:string"/>
      </xs:sequence>
    </xs:restriction>
  </xs:complexContent>
</xs:complexType>
----


=== Compliant solution

[source,xml]
----
<xs:complexType name="FruitBase>
  <xs:sequence>
    <xs:element name="name" type="xs:string"/>
  </xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="ColoredFruit>
  <xs:sequence>
    <!-- Bottom-up design, using aggregation -->
    <xs:element name="base" type="FruitBase"/>
    <xs:element name="color" type="xs:string" minOccurs="0"/>
  </xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
----


ifdef::env-github,rspecator-view[]

'''
== Implementation Specification
(visible only on this page)

=== Message

Remove this "restriction", and consider "extension" instead.


=== Highlighting

``++xs:restriction++``


endif::env-github,rspecator-view[]