You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to j-users@xerces.apache.org by "Usorov, Evgeny" <EU...@kbv.de> on 2004/07/08 16:17:37 UTC
Problem with derivation by restriction with Element
Hallo,
Waht is the position, point of view of W3C with derivation by restriction of <any> Element? The situation is:
I have an schema, that i want to restrict. At one place schema is open and has an Element where <any> Element with maxOccur="unbounded" is defined. I want to define two Elements ("foo" and "bar")instead of the any-deklaration. For example:
<xs:complexType name="basis_test_typ">
<xs:sequence>
<xs:any maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
my derived Type:
<xs:complexType name="derived_test_typ">
<xs:complexContent>
<xs:restriction base="basis_test_typ">
<xs:sequence>
<xs:element name="foo"/>
<xs:element name="bar"/>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:restriction>
</xs:complexContent>
</xs:complexType>
so with two defined elements i get error-message from Microsoft msxml4. With Xerces-Parser (verion 2.6.2) i get no error-message, but as i previously wrote Xerces-Parser don't recognize invalid derivation by restriction. With declaration of only one element ("foo") i don't get errors. Does everybody knows, what is the position, point of view of W3C ? Are Microsoft errors correct ?
Evgeny
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-j-user-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-j-user-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Problem with derivation by restriction with Element
Posted by Sandy Gao <sa...@ca.ibm.com>.
The position of W3C is the position of Xerces, unless Xerces has a bug. :-)
Carefully following the constraints in section 3.9.6 of the schema spec
part 1 [1], I believe your example is valid. Note that the sequence around
<xs:any> is pointless.
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#cos-particle-restrict
> ... but as i previously wrote Xerces-Parser don't recognize invalid
> derivation by restriction.
You mean the message you sent on June 16/17? Apparently that was valid too.
You don't have to repeat all the attributes in a complex type derived by
restriction. Attributes from the base type are automatically inherited.
Hope this helps,
Sandy Gao
Software Developer, IBM Canada
(1-905) 413-3255
sandygao@ca.ibm.com
"Usorov, Evgeny" <EU...@kbv.de> wrote on 07/08/2004 10:17:37 AM:
> Hallo,
>
> Waht is the position, point of view of W3C with derivation by
> restriction of <any> Element? The situation is:
> I have an schema, that i want to restrict. At one place schema is
> open and has an Element where <any> Element with
> maxOccur="unbounded" is defined. I want to define two Elements
> ("foo" and "bar")instead of the any-deklaration. For example:
>
> <xs:complexType name="basis_test_typ">
> <xs:sequence>
> <xs:any maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
> </xs:sequence>
> </xs:complexType>
>
> my derived Type:
> <xs:complexType name="derived_test_typ">
> <xs:complexContent>
> <xs:restriction base="basis_test_typ">
> <xs:sequence>
> <xs:element name="foo"/>
> <xs:element name="bar"/>
> </xs:sequence>
> </xs:restriction>
> </xs:complexContent>
> </xs:complexType>
>
>
> so with two defined elements i get error-message from Microsoft
> msxml4. With Xerces-Parser (verion 2.6.2) i get no error-message,
> but as i previously wrote Xerces-Parser don't recognize invalid
> derivation by restriction. With declaration of only one element
> ("foo") i don't get errors. Does everybody knows, what is the
> position, point of view of W3C ? Are Microsoft errors correct ?
>
>
> Evgeny
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-j-user-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-j-user-help@xml.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-j-user-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-j-user-help@xml.apache.org