- From: <zongaro@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 07:54:48 -0400
- To: "Martin Gudgin" <marting@develop.com>
- Cc: <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Hi Martin,
Thank you for pointing out that restriction on model group definition
- I had missed that. So now the question becomes (as Martin points out):
why is it that 3.8.2 permits minOccurs=0 on an "all" element, but 3.7.2 and
3.8.6 (Schema Component Constraint: All Group Limited) prohibit the value
from being zero for all uses, and was that what was really intended?
Thanks,
Henry
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henry Zongaro XML Parsers development
IBM SWS Toronto Lab Tie Line 778-6044; Phone (416) 448-6044
mailto:zongaro@ca.ibm.com
"Martin Gudgin" <marting@develop.com> on 2001/05/16 05:33:32 PM
To: Henry Zongaro/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
cc:
Subject: Re: All Group Limited
The top level compositor of a named model group may *not* have
minOccurs/maxOccurs so your initial example if not valid.
I *thought* we allowed <all> to have minOccurs='0' but it appears that
section 1.2 of 3.8.6 - Schema Component Constraint: All Group Limited is
at
variance with 3.8.2 :-(
Martin Gudgin
DevelopMentor
----- Original Message -----
From: <zongaro@ca.ibm.com>
To: <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 6:31 PM
Subject: All Group Limited
>
> Hello,
>
> Section 3.8.6 [1] of "XML Schema Part 1: Structures" defines The
> "Schema Component Constraint: All Group Limited". According to item 1.
of
> that constraint, a model group whose {compositor} is "all" must either
> (1.1) appear as the model group of a model group definition or (1.2)
appear
> in a particle with {min occurs}={max occurs}=1, with additional
> requirements placed on that particle.
>
> If I'm reading this correctly, it means that an "all" {compositor}
can
> have {min occurs}=0 only if it appears in a model group definition.
That's
> because an "all" schema component corresponds to a particle whose {term}
is
> a model group with {compositor} all - so 1.2 would appear to apply to
that
> particle, and {min occurs} must equal 1.
>
> So, the following fragment would be valid according to the "All Group
> Limited" constraint.
>
> <xs:group name="gp">
> <xs:all minOccurs="0">
> <xs:element ref="a"/>
> <xs:element ref="b"/>
> </xs:all>
> </xs:group>
>
> <xs:complexType>
> <xs:group ref="gp"/>
> </xs:complexType>
>
> But the following fragment would not be valid.
>
> <xs:complexType>
> <xs:all minOccurs="0">
> <xs:element ref="a"/>
> <xs:element ref="b"/>
> </xs:all>
> </xs:complexType>
>
> Is my interpretation of that constraint correct? Or was the phrase
> "in a particle" intended only to refer to particles that contain the
> particle corresponding to the "all" schema component, which would mean
that
> my second fragement would be valid, but the following would not be.
>
> <xs:group name="gp">
> <xs:all>
> <xs:element ref="a"/>
> <xs:element ref="b"/>
> </xs:all>
> </xs:group>
>
> <xs:complexType>
> <xs:group ref="gp" minOccurs="0"/>
> </xs:complexType>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Henry
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#coss-modelGroup
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Henry Zongaro XML Parsers development
> IBM SWS Toronto Lab Tie Line 778-6044; Phone (416) 448-6044
> mailto:zongaro@ca.ibm.com
>
Received on Thursday, 17 May 2001 07:53:40 UTC