Hi Considering the following schema: <xs:group name="g1"> <xs:sequence> <xs:element name="a" type="xs:int" minOccurs="0"/> <xs:element name="b" type="xs:int" minOccurs="0"/> </xs:sequence> </xs:group> <xs:group name="g2"> <xs:sequence> <xs:element name="c" type="xs:int" minOccurs="0"/> <xs:element name="d" type="xs:int" minOccurs="0"/> </xs:sequence> </xs:group> <xs:element name="elem"> <xs:complexType> <xs:sequence> <xs:choice> <xs:group ref="g1"/> <xs:group ref="g2"/> </xs:choice> </xs:sequence> </xs:complexType> </xs:element> Should it be an UPA violation if we have an "elem" element with no child? Because in this case we know the content of the element is either of the groups but we don't know which one (because both can be empty). Or I missed something? Regards, --drkm _____________________________________________________________________________ Envoyez avec Yahoo! Mail. Une boite mail plus intelligente http://mail.yahoo.frReceived on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 11:15:20 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 16 April 2008 11:15:21 GMT