W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > December 2001

RE: Proposed Issue 173 Resolution (Hierarchical Fault Codes)

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:59:15 -0800
Message-ID: <79107D208BA38C45A4E45F62673A434D05CBCFB7@red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Marc Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

So, if we are going with elements then the schema will look like this:

<xs:simpleType name="faultcodeEnum">
   <xs:restriction base="xs:QName">
     <xs:enumeration value="tns:DataEncodingUnknown" />
     <xs:enumeration value="tns:MustUnderstand" />
     <xs:enumeration value="tns:VersionMismatch" />
     <xs:enumeration value="tns:Sender" />
     <xs:enumeration value="tns:Receiver" />

<xs:complexType name="subcodeType" >
     <xs:element name="value" type="xs:QName" minOccurs="1" />
     <xs:element name="subcode" type="tns:subcodeType" minOccurs="0" />

<xs:complexType name="faultcodeType" >
     <xs:element name="value" type="tns:faultcodeEnum" minOccurs="1" />
     <xs:element name="subcode" type="tns:subcodeType" minOccurs="0" />

Where faultcodeType and subcodeType are to be compared with the previous
model proposed in [20]:

<xs:complexType name='faultcodeType' >
    <xs:element name='value' type='tns:faultcodeEnum' />
    <xs:element name='sub' type='xsd:QName' minOccurs='0'

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen

[20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Dec/0000.html

>I could live with that. I prefer attributes because they are generally 
>easier to process since you don't have to worry about their content 
>being broken up into sub-strings by the parser...
Received on Monday, 17 December 2001 12:59:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:17 UTC