- From: Hugh Wallis <hugh_wallis@hyperion.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 12:25:18 -0500
- To: "Morris Matsa" <mmatsa@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Thanks Morris a) Yes, that was my question - I think Henry has now answered it for me b) Thanks - I couldn't find any links to it Everyone's input has been much appreciated Hugh Wallis ----- Original Message ----- From: "Morris Matsa" <mmatsa@us.ibm.com> To: "Hugh Wallis" <hugh_wallis@hyperion.com> Cc: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com>; <xmlschema-dev@w3.org> Sent: Sunday, 23 February, 2003 11:21 PM Subject: Re: More on xs:anySimpleType a) Can I assume that your question is not whether a type can derive from anySimpleType, but whether a schema can reference anySimpleType? For example: <xsd:element name="name" type="xsd:anySimpleType" /> This includes no derivation and no type declaration, neither a local one nor a global one. b) I believe the errata is publically available at http://www.w3.org/2001/05/xmlschema-errata "Hugh Wallis" <hugh_wallis@hyperion.com>@w3.org on 02/23/2003 07:55:09 PM Sent by: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org To: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org> cc: Subject: Re: More on xs:anySimpleType Thanks Dare These were interesting but unfortunately a) Neither of them seems to shed any light on the legality or otherwise of stating type="xs:anySimpletype" in general (they only confirm that types can be derived from it in the S4S but not by users) - so that still leaves open the question of why .NET prohibits it but all other parsers I have tried (including Microsoft's own MSXML) appear to allow it and b) The links to the resolution of the issues are on a members only part of the W3C website, there are no links directly to the Errata and I cannot find any public Errata list on the W3C website - at least not referenced at http://www.w3.org/XML/Schema Cheers Hugh ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com> To: "Hugh Wallis" <hugh_wallis@hyperion.com>; <xmlschema-dev@w3.org> Sent: Sunday, 23 February, 2003 7:02 PM Subject: RE: More on xs:anySimpleType There are several known issues with xs:anySimpleType I suggest reading http://www.w3.org/2001/05/xmlschema-rec-comments#pfiur-type and http://www.w3.org/2001/05/xmlschema-rec-comments#pfiS4SanySimpleType ________________________________ From: Hugh Wallis [mailto:hugh_wallis@hyperion.com] Sent: Sun 2/23/2003 2:47 PM To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org Subject: More on xs:anySimpleType Hit the send button a mite too fast on my previous question since I now find the following at http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#section-Built-in-Simple-Type-Definition There is a simple type definition nearly equivalent to the simple version of the ·ur-type definition· <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#key-urType> present in every schema by definition. It has the following properties: Simple Type Definition of the Ur-Type Property Value {name} <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#st-name> anySimpleType {target namespace} <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#st-target_namespace> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema {base type definition} <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#st-base_type_definition> ·the ur-type definition· <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#ur-type-itself> {final} <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#st-final> The empty set {variety} <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#variety> ·absent· <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#key-null> But I'm not sure that this entirely answers the question - the words "nearly equivalent" are worrying as the exact impact of the use of the word "nearly "doesn't seem to be fully explained. Again any insight would be helpful. Thanks Hugh Wallis
Received on Monday, 24 February 2003 12:25:55 UTC