- From: Steven Baker <steven.baker@adazzle.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 15:53:50 +0100
- To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
- Cc: "Jeni Tennison" <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Hi Jeni Thanks for the response, I had started to come to realise that my initial assumption that this would be easy were wrong. For the suggestions - thanks - the xsi:type could be a good way to go (if I cant get what I need with keys - see below). I want to stay within the boundaries of XSD so would rather transform to a unique named elements style syntax and validate that rather than using schematron or switching to Relax NG. I have 2 questions (well, a comment and a question) 1 - Has anyone found a way round this using keys? My thought was that I could at least define which fileds must not be null using Keys - this right?? Anyone found any cunning ways to define a bit more using this or is non-null as good as it gets? (would just about do for my current purposes) 2 - Isn't this a bit of an obvious flaw in XSD and is a fix / enhancement intended - essentially (as I see it, anyway), you can only do useful validation of data (rather than just structure) IF you have unique element names in your XML? I see one of the key benefits of XML as being is flexibility - by using common element names processing templates and functions are MUCH simpler - yes, there are work arounds but is it that big an ask to have XSD able to define type by element name and then, say, extend it depending on an attribute type (have NO idea how complex this would make an implementation...) Anyway - thanks for the suggestion sand clarification Steve
Received on Monday, 22 September 2003 11:02:19 UTC