- 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