W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > November 2009

RE: Reg. <all> model group extension

From: bharath <bharathkr@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:26:39 +0530
To: 'Michael Kay' <mike@saxonica.com>, 'Pete Cordell' <petexmldev@codalogic.com>, xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Cc: rajithr@huawei.com, arathikarki@huawei.com, ksrilakshmi@huawei.com
Message-id: <002001ca71d5$b4b9d210$2301120a@china.huawei.com>
 
Hi Michek Kay,

Can you please give me any example for the clause 2 of 3.9.6 as i have not
understood that point clearly.


Thanks and Regards,
Bharath.



-----Original Message-----
From: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org [mailto:xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Michael Kay
Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 9:12 PM
To: 'bharath'; 'Pete Cordell'; xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Cc: rajithr@huawei.com; arathikarki@huawei.com; ksrilakshmi@huawei.com
Subject: RE: Reg. <all> model group extension

Look for Schema Component Constraint: Particle Valid (Extension) in 3.9.6.
Clause 2 says that the {term} must be a sequence group (it cannot be choice
or all).

Regards,

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
http://twitter.com/michaelhkay 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org
> [mailto:xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of bharath
> Sent: 30 November 2009 15:23
> To: 'Michael Kay'; 'Pete Cordell'; xmlschema-dev@w3.org
> Cc: rajithr@huawei.com; arathikarki@huawei.com; ksrilakshmi@huawei.com
> Subject: RE: Reg. <all> model group extension
> 
> Hi Pete Cordell/ Michek Kay
> 
> Thanks for your reply. 
> Can you please tell me where I can find this limitation of <all> 
> extension in xml schema specification.
> 
> 
> Thanks and Regards,
> Bharath.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org
> [mailto:xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Michael Kay
> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 8:41 PM
> To: 'Pete Cordell'; 'bharath'; xmlschema-dev@w3.org
> Cc: rajithr@huawei.com; arathikarki@huawei.com
> Subject: RE: Reg. <all> model group extension
> 
>  
> > 
> > I don't believe you are allowed to extend xs:all in XSD 1.0.  
> > This has been relaxed in the upcoming 1.1.
> 
> Correct (thanks for spotting this, Pete).
> 
> After fixing a couple of typos (bad XML end tags), I get the following 
> from Saxon 9.2 running with -xsdversion:1.0:
> 
> Error on line 15 of test.xsd:
>   The type DerivedType is defined with xs:all so (in XSD 1.0) it 
> cannot be derived by
>   extension from a non-empty type
> Schema processing failed: The schema is invalid
> 
> but with -xsdversion:1.1 I get:
> 
> Schema checking successful.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Michael Kay
> http://www.saxonica.com/
> http://twitter.com/michaelhkay
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 30 November 2009 15:57:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:15:15 GMT