- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 10:28:15 +0000
- To: Mike_Leditschke@nemmco.com.au
- CC: vdv@dyomedea.com, xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Hi Mike, > Given your comment on the note, I proceeded to explicitly define a > base and derived type for Container and used these in the > corresponding Base and Restricted type, but still get the same > error. The schema looks fine to me. I might have missed something, but I suspect that Xerces-J-1.4.1 has a bug. You might try using Xerces-J 2 instead? > I suspect I still haven't quite understood. Specifically, I didn't > understand what Eric meant by > > "This would limit the recursion to the top level of complex type > definitions, which seems reasonable..." I think he meant that when you restrict a complex type, the schema processor doesn't keep looking down the type/element/type/element hierarchy, expecting a (restrictive) change in the content of each element. Instead, you have to explicity specify that an element's type is a restriction of the base element's type. > I would have thought that I could be an arbitrary number of element > definitions deep, but provided the named type I use is a valid > restriction of the one used in the base definition, I should be ok. Yes, I think you are correct in that. Cheers, Jeni --- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com/
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2001 06:50:19 UTC