W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > October 2003

no response??? schemas, leveraging their object orientedness??

From: Dean Hiller <dhiller@avaya.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 08:31:22 -0600
Message-ID: <3F914EBA.4090103@avaya.com>
To: Dean Hiller <dhiller@avaya.com>
Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org

Anybody? please??

Dean Hiller wrote:

> If I have some xml implementating schema A.xsd
> <superclass>
>    <someElement/>
> </superclass>
> And then I write B.xsd which extends A.xsd and the xml looks something 
> like this
> <subclass xmnls="......A.xsd">
>     <someElement/>
>     <anAddedElement/>
> </subclass>
> BUT, I must be missing something.  There is now a program A which only 
> knows about A.xsd.  It should be able to receive the xml that adheres 
> to B.xsd and just skip the unknown elements and only deal with the 
> known ones(ie someElement).  The problem is there seems to be nothing 
> to tell the parser that subclass extends superclass unless you know of 
> B.xsd.
> I thought the idea of extensions was object-orientedness.  The 
> subclass should be able to be read by program A as the superclass.  
> (ie. program A knows about a car, and we created a Ford car, so 
> program A can still see it as a car).  I am afraid that a parser will 
> puke at this since it does not adhere to A.xsd.  There must be 
> something else in the xml I am missing?????
> Also, how would I write the xsd and xml for this?  I wish the tutorial 
> explained more in this area.  I would say this is by far the most 
> important part of xsd's.  Extension without breaking previous 
> programs. Previous programs just ignore additional data.
> thanks,
> dean
Received on Saturday, 18 October 2003 10:31:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:56:03 UTC