- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:00:57 -0000
- To: "'Dan Vint'" <dvint@dvint.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
> > Can someone explain these two constructs and any advantage or > disadvantage > to using one over the other? For elements, it's true enough that a complex type with simple content and no attributes is much the same as a simple type. But a simple type can also be used to define the type of an attribute. When it comes to writing schema-aware queries and stylesheets, simple types (especially atomic types) are much more flexible than complex types, because a free-standing XPath value can have an atomic type, but only element nodes can have a complex type. There might be similar considerations when using data binding tools, I don't know. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Received on Thursday, 12 January 2006 09:01:12 UTC