- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 10:04:09 -0000
- To: "'Luke Graham'" <lukeg@multitrode.com.au>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
> > I have a problem with some schemas that Im writing. They look > as follows... > > <xs:complexType name="foo"/> > > <xs:element name="_1" type="foo"/> > <xs:element name="_2" type="foo"/> > ..... > > I want to write something along these lines instead... > > <xs:element name="*" type="foo" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="64"/> > > Is it possible? No. Is this a vocabulary you are designing, or one that already exists? It looks as if it's trying to capture information by means of structured element names, which is always a bad idea: use attributes instead. > > And... I want to give a range to a simple integer, without deriving a > new type - > > <xs:element name="bar" type="xs:int" minInclusive="0" > maxInclusive="10"/> > > Do I really have to derive a new type each time? That seems excessive. Each of the elements has a different type, so it seems reasonable to acknowledge the fact. You can use anonymous types if you want. The syntax is long-winded but at least it doesn't try to hide what's happening: <xsl:element name="bar"> <xs:simpleType> <xs:restriction base="xs:integer"> ... Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Received on Tuesday, 18 January 2005 10:04:15 UTC