Re[2]: Complex Type extension

Thanks for the suggestions...

JT> Priscilla wrote:
>> That's invalid. When you are using extension, you can't alter any of
>> the attributes of the base type. If you have control over
>> CheckGroupType, you could have both CheckGroupType and your new type
>> extend the same base type, one with the attribute optional, and one
>> with the attribute required. This would allow the content model and
>> other attributes to be defined in only one place.

JT> Another option would be to turn the hierarchy around, such that the
JT> type that requires the Logic attribute is derived by restriction from
JT> the type that has an optional Logic attribute. This suffers from the
JT> usual annoyances of derivation by restriction (having to repeat all
JT> the content), though...



-- 
groovy baby,
 Kevin                    xmldude@burieddreams.com

++++++++++++ Cool music - http://marshanrock.com

Received on Wednesday, 1 May 2002 17:24:40 UTC