and have the new derived type be in a different namespace than the
original base type?
I've banged on this for 2 days now and I'm starting to think the
answer is no. I've searched this group and have not seen anything
discussing this.
>From Walmsley: "The values for the new type are a subset of those forthe base type. All values of the restricted type are also valid
according to the base type".
Now since all values of the restricted type are also valid according
to the base type, it follows that the namespace of the derived type
must be the same as the namespace of the base type. Otherwise the
instances of the derived type would not conform to the base type.
My question: Is it possible to derive a complex type via restriction
and have the new derived type be in a different namespace than the
original base type?