- From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 19:44:22 +0600
- To: "WS-Desc WG \(Public\)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Thanks Mike for showing exactly what non-XSD types being described in XSD would look like. So it comes down to: > > <xs:complexType name="medical-record"> > > <xs:sequence> > > <xs:element name="person-name" type="xs:string"/> > > <xs:element name="head-xray" type="tns:gif"/> > > </xs:sequence> > > </xs:complexType> > > > > <xs:simpleType name="gif"> > > <xs:restriction base="xs:base64Binary"> > > <xs:annotation> > > <xs:appinfo> > > <content:mediaType value="image/gif"/> > > </xs:appinfo> > > </xs:annotation> > > </xs:restriction> > > </xs:simpleType> vs.: > > <message name="medical-record"> > > <part name="person-name" type="xsd:string"/> > > <part name="head-xray" mimeType="image/gif"/> > > </message> I still maintain that the latter is a *much* more natural way to express the statement that message consists of two items, the patient's name and his xray. Sanjiva.
Received on Monday, 6 May 2002 09:47:29 UTC