- From: Jason Diamond <jason@injektilo.org>
- Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:04:36 -0800
- To: "Martin Gudgin" <marting@develop.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Thanks, Martin. That makes perfect sense. So far, I've only implemented restrictions for simpleTypes in my schema parser. So the only example I could test was a nested restriction which didn't strike me as being at all useful. Jason. > -----Original Message----- > From: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org > [mailto:xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Martin Gudgin > Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 7:41 PM > To: Jason Diamond; xmlschema-dev@w3.org > Subject: Re: restrictions with nested simpleTypes. > > > Hi Jason, > > Because maybe you don't want to expose the inner type to the outside > world... If it only gets used in one context then it makes sense to 'hide' > it like this. > > FWIW the Schema-for-schemas uses this technique for the type of maxOccurs; > > <simpleType name="allNNI"> > <annotation><documentation xml:lang="en"> > for maxOccurs</documentation></annotation> > <union memberTypes="nonNegativeInteger"> > <simpleType> > <restriction base="NMTOKEN"> > <enumeration value="unbounded"/> > </restriction> > </simpleType> > </union> > </simpleType> > > Or is your question about having a restriction within a restriction? If so > then I can't of the top of my head think of a situation where you would > *need* to do it that way. The syntax allows it but > > <xsd:simpleType name='fooType'> > <xsd:restriction> > <xsd:simpleType> > <xsd:restriction base='xsd:string'> > <xsd:minLength value='6' /> > </xsd:restriction> > </xsd:simpleType> > </xsd:restriction> > </xsd:simpleType> > > would have the same value space and lexical space as; > > <xsd:simpleType name='fooType'> > <xsd:restriction base='xsd:string'> > <xsd:minLength value='6' /> > </xsd:restriction> > </xsd:simpleType> > > although at the component level they would look slightly different. > > Gudge > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jason Diamond" <jason@injektilo.org> > To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org> > Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 6:58 PM > Subject: restrictions with nested simpleTypes. > > > > I don't understand why the base attribute isn't good enough. > Why would you > > ever do this? > > > > <xsd:simpleType name="fooType"> > > <xsd:restriction> > > <xsd:simpleType> > > <xsd:restriction base="xsd:string"> > > <!-- ... --> > > </xsd:restriction> > > </xsd:simpleType> > > <!-- ... --> > > </xsd:restriction> > > </xsd:simpleType> > > > > Thanks, > > Jason. >
Received on Sunday, 10 December 2000 23:09:19 UTC