- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 12 Jan 2002 11:37:31 +0000
- To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: xmlschema-dev <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk> writes: <snip/> > The old schema had <complexType>s for each of the Dublin Core > elements, since I was told, that made it easier to re-use the > schema(s) by redefining and/or restricting them. > > The example I was given was, having made <complexType> dc:title > like: > > <complexType name="dc:title" mixed="true"> > <sequence> > <any processContents="lax" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> > </sequence> > <attribute ref='xml:lang'/> > </complexType> In the once you sent the list, the xml:lang wasn't there, so aside from giving a name, you just had the ur-type. You can always restrict something whose type is the ur-type, so naming didn't seem necessary. Redefine is of course different. > <element name="dc:title" type="dc:title"/> > > (or somesuch) it allowed in another schema: > > <complexType name="title"> > <complexContent> > <restriction base="dc:title"> > <sequence> > <element name="mainTitle" type="string"/> > <element name="secondaryTitle" type="string"/> > </sequence> > <attribute ref='xml:lang'/> > <restriction> > <complexContent> > <complexType> Yes, but _only_ if you want to include that in a redefine, otherwise it achieves nothing. And it's not obvious to my what use case you have in mind that motivates preparing for redefine. ht -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
Received on Saturday, 12 January 2002 06:37:34 UTC