W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > November 2003

RE: versioning use case

From: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@microsoft.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 11:02:53 -0800
Message-ID: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D1D51740@RED-MSG-31.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Dean Hiller" <dhiller@avaya.com>
Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>

comments inline 

________________________________

From: Dean Hiller [mailto:dhiller@avaya.com]
Sent: Sat 11/22/2003 10:12 AM
To: Dare Obasanjo
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Subject: Re: versioning use case



This is exactly what I mean though.  A company has extended the schema
using "extension", yet I don't want their additional features.  I just
want to validate the base schema is ok.  I can't.  It is all or nothing.
 I have to validate base schema plus the companies additional
elements(their extension), or I can't validate it at all.

[Dare Obasanjo] If the base complex type has a wildcard with processContents="lax" then you can get what you want. 

 The only thing is I think it is much cleaner to do extension.
 It is like OO. 

[Dare Obasanjo] W3C XML Schema isn't like OO, it seems like it is but it isn't. I've gone into this in more detail at http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/10/29/derivation.html 
Received on Saturday, 22 November 2003 14:03:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:22 GMT