W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > May 2002

Re: issue: optional parts in <message>?

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 19:44:22 +0600
Message-ID: <012f01c1f504$22d67980$07aa7cca@lankabook2>
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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:20 GMT