- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 16:58:22 +0100
- To: "Savas Parastatidis" <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Cc: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>, "Jim Webber" <jim.webber@arjuna.com>, "Paul Watson" <Paul.Watson@newcastle.ac.uk>
"Savas Parastatidis" <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk> writes:
> A few weeks ago, I argued in Global Grid Forum's OGSI working group that
> trying to do something like the following in XML Schema was not valid.
>
> <xs:complexType name="myType">
> <xs:complexContent>
> <xs:restriction base="xs:element">
> ...
> </xs:restriction>
> </xs:complexContent>
> </xs:complexType>
>
> With xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
There's nothing I'm aware of in the REC to stop you doing this.
There is a type definition with that name in the schema for schemas.
Like any other type definition that doesn't include
final='restriction', you can derive new type definitions from it by
restriction.
Purists would probably argue you should include
<xs:import namespace="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"/>
in your schema document.
What made you think this wasn't allowed? I didn't understand your
comment "since the XML Schema specification is defined as an infoset,
the XML Schema <element> element that is defined in the normative XML
Schema schema (I hope this makes sense) should not be used in the
above manner".
ht
--
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
Half-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/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2003 11:58:24 UTC