- From: Xan Gregg <Xan.Gregg@jmp.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 10:13:29 -0400
- To: "Jochen Wiedmann" <jochen.wiedmann@softwareag.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
- Cc: "Mik Lernout" <mik@futurestreet.org>
I suppose the issue is that the spec indicates that
the complex content option should be chosen,
The property mappings below are also used in the case
where the third alternative (neither <simpleContent>
nor <complexContent>) is chosen. This case is understood
as shorthand for complex content restricting the *ur-type
definition*, and the details of the mappings should be
modified as necessary.
but the property mapping lose the mixed flag when the
content is empty. This has been fixed as E1-5 in the
errata document
http://www.w3.org/2001/05/xmlschema-errata
So the type is mixed with complex content and a trival content model.
xan
[1]
-----Original Message-----
From: Jochen Wiedmann
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 8:16 AM
To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Cc: Mik Lernout
Subject: Empty complexType with "mixed" attribute
Hi,
suggest the following type definition:
<complexType mixed="true">
<attribute name="test" type="xs:string"/>
</complexType>
We are currently discussing, how to evaluate this, with two possible
solutions:
- Take it as it is, a complex type with complex content and
XsContentType "mixed".
- Take it as a complex type with simple content and base xs:string.
Would the simple content approach be permissive or are there any subtle
differences?
Regards,
Jochen
Received on Monday, 13 September 2004 14:13:38 UTC