- From: Erik Johnson <ejohnson@epicor.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 17:18:14 -0800
- To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <BF9C5B9528B9C246BC41C7B988C49C87026C597E@slate.americas.epicor.net>
I have two toolkits (from the same company, BTW) that compile the schema shown below differently. One says the schema is fine while the other says the choice inside grpC/ElementC1 violates the UPA rule. This example looks a bit contrived, but it's a reduction from something a lot more complex that obviously could be re-factored. On the surface, I can see why one might think having grpA in choice particles at two levels within ElementC1 makes the content ambiguous. But after thinking about it, I don't think that the content model is ambiguous. My question is which toolkit is right and which one gets my bug report? Thanks! <xs:schema id="XMLSchema1" targetNamespace="uri:erik:upaQuestion" elementFormDefault="qualified" xmlns="uri:erik:upaQuestion" xmlns:tns="uri:erik:upaQuestion" xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"> <xs:group name="grpA"> <xs:sequence> <xs:element name="ElementA1"/> </xs:sequence> </xs:group> <xs:group name="grpB"> <xs:choice> <xs:element name="ElementB1" /> <xs:group ref="tns:grpA"/> </xs:choice> </xs:group> <xs:group name="grpC"> <xs:sequence> <xs:element name="ElementC1"> <xs:complexType> <xs:sequence> <xs:choice> <xs:group ref="tns:grpB"/> <xs:group ref="tns:grpA"/> </xs:choice> </xs:sequence> </xs:complexType> </xs:element> </xs:sequence> </xs:group> <xs:element name="RootElement"> <xs:complexType> <xs:choice> <xs:group ref="tns:grpC"/> <xs:sequence> <xs:element name="OtherStuff" /> </xs:sequence> </xs:choice> </xs:complexType> </xs:element> </xs:schema>
Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2006 01:18:33 UTC