Christophe Duquesne
Christophe Duquesne
I just checked: in this specific case you can remove the nested `` (it does not change the content and would be nicer modeling)... but you cant' to it everywhere...
If you extract all the empty nesting, then we can check them... but I don't see how to avoid a manual check (one by one) ... but if this is...
for each of them, we need to check how the `XXX `of `base="XXX"` looks like and the check against what have been selected in the `xsd:restriction` to tell if we...
unfortunately not... but if the number of cases is no too huge I'm ok to walk through them
I close it here... to be managed together with to https://github.com/NeTEx-CEN/NeTEx/pull/744
I don't really remember that example (it must be pretty old, over 10 years, since NEPTUNE is not used any-more for quite long.. it was the equivalent of the UK...
No generic patterns here, unfortunately, and often, no real issue... take the first one: a ValidityCondition is a DataManagedObject and a DataManagedObject can have ValidityCondition ... and quite a lot...
I think that it makes sense to complement them with a `substitutionGroup="VersionedChild"`
I can't see this: 
I have this, but this is not an additional Id, it is the specialisation of the Id to a type="PassengerCapacityIdType" (the original Id being inherited from ENTITY IN VERSION ...)