> > >>Since a derivation by extension always creates the new type by >>"sequencing" together the content in the base type with the content >>in the derived type you can *never* use <xs:all> as part of an >>extension. >> >> > >If the base type def'n was empty and the extension was all and only a >valid <all>, I think the sequence is waived and the result would be OK. > Yes, that's probably correct. So, the following would probably be valid: <xs:complexType name="base"> <xs:complexContent> <xs:restriction base="xs:anyType"> <xs:attribute name="name" type="xs:string"/> </xs:restriction> </xs:complexContent> </xs:complexType> <xs:complexType name="base"> <xs:complexContent> <xs:extension base="base"> <xs:all> <xs:element name="1"/> <xs:element name="2"/> </xs:all> </xs:extension> </xs:complexContent> </xs:complexType> Yes, I think that makes sense. Thanks for the correction. /Eddie > >ht > >Received on Wednesday, 30 October 2002 18:08:50 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 16 March 2009 11:13:25 GMT