- From: Dean Hiller <dean@xsoftware.biz>
- Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 13:11:16 -0700
- To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
That makes much sense. thankyou. one last question though. Isn't the "Versioning XML Languages Draft" assuming schema 1.1? I thought it might be, but it doesn't look like it states either-or. thanks, dean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Xan Gregg" <xan.gregg@jmp.com> To: "Dean Hiller" <dean@xsoftware.biz> Cc: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org> Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 8:52 AM Subject: Re: non deterministic any element??? > > Schema B is non-deterministic because after encountering a > <callbackLocation> element it will accept either an element matching > the "NewElementInVersion2" element particle or an element matching the > "any" particle. Since < NewElementInVersion2> matches both of those > possibilities, it is ambiguous. (There is no "unique particle" > attributed to the element, so it violates the "Unique Particle > Attribution" constraint of XML Schema.) > > Same for schema C. > > B and C would be OK in XML Schema 1.1 as proposed in the public Working > Draft [1] because wildcard particles will be subordinate to explicit > element particles. (RQ-36i) > > xan > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xmlschema11-1-20040716/structures.html > > > On Nov 25, 2004, at 7:44 PM, Dean Hiller wrote: > > After reading the Versioning XML Languages Draft, I am a bit confused > > on why the any element is non-deterministic. Below, I whipped > > together 3 schemas. Say A is schema version1, B is schema > > version2(same namespace), and C is companyX extending version 1. Why > > would the xml below the schema's be non-deterministic??? ie. if I > > throw doc B at a program that only knows schema A or throw doc C at a > > program that only knows schema B, etc. thanks for any help in > > understanding here. I am really just trying to understand section > > 9.1(http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-20031003#d0e971) > >
Received on Monday, 29 November 2004 20:11:44 UTC