- From: Mike Skells <mike.skells@ebizz-consulting.com>
- Date: 05 Dec 2005 16:00:28 -0700
- To: <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <00d501c5cb10$52aef480$0a01a8c0@MikeLaptop>
Hi, I dont believe that the definition is quite correct the definition for 1.0 is <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#element-sequence> <sequence> One of the following must be true: 2.2.1 <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#particles> {particles} is empty. 2.2.2 All of the following must be true: 2.2.2.1 The particle within which this <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#element-sequence> <sequence> appears has <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#p-max_occurs> {max occurs} and <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#p-min_occurs> {min occurs} of 1. 2.2.2.2 One of the following must be true: 2.2.2.2.1 The <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#element-sequence> <sequence>'s <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#particles> {particles} has only one member. 2.2.2.2.2 The particle within which this <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#element-sequence> <sequence> appears is itself among the <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#particles> {particles} of a <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#element-sequence> <sequence>. <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#element-all> <all> One of the following must be true: 2.2.1 <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#particles> {particles} is empty. 2.2.2 <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#particles> {particles} has only one member. <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#element-choice> <choice> One of the following must be true: 2.2.1 <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#particles> {particles} is empty and the particle within which this <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#element-choice> <choice> appears has <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#p-min_occurs> {min occurs} of 0. 2.2.2 All of the following must be true: 2.2.2.1 The particle within which this <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#element-choice> <choice> appears has <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#p-max_occurs> {max occurs} and <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#p-min_occurs> {min occurs} of 1. 2.2.2.2 One of the following must be true: 2.2.2.2.1 The <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#element-choice> <choice>'s <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#particles> {particles} has only one member. 2.2.2.2.2 The particle within which this <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#element-choice> <choice> appears is itself among the <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#particles> {particles} of a <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#element-choice> <choice>. However this ignores any use of annotations. is it unreasonable to have a sequence that includes another sequence, where he included sequence has some annotation, for example some custom documntation that presents some meaning and context to the included sequence. Similarly there could be (and indeed is is some of the schames that I use) a appInfo element that affects the use of the contained sequence. With the current definition the redundency is correct if the annotation is not being processed, for instance if the schema is being considered forely for validation, but it is not pointless for other applications. I would appriciate your comments on the above Yours Mike Skells Chief Architect ValidSoft Ltd
Received on Monday, 5 December 2005 23:02:51 UTC