- From: Pete Cordell <pete@tech-know-ware.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 13:51:48 -0000
- To: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>
- Cc: "Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Ah - Got it. Many thanks. Pete. Original Message From: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" > On 8 Feb 2007, at 05:38 , Pete Cordell wrote: >> So does the abstractness of the type become a property of the >> element? i.e. >> >> <xs:element name='myElement' type='abstractType'/> >> >> is equivalent to: >> >> >> <xs:element name='myElement' type='abstractType' abstract='true'/> >> ? > .... > Neither > allows an element instance like > > <myElement>...</myElement> > > but if the schema defines 'concreteType' as a concrete type derived > from abstractType, then the first declaration allows > > <myElement xsi:type="concreteType">...</myElement> > > to appear in the document -- it is the type which is abstract, not > the element. The second declaration, by contrast, does not allow > such an element instance. -- ============================================= Pete Cordell Tech-Know-Ware Ltd for XML to C++ data binding visit http://www.tech-know-ware.com/lmx (or http://www.xml2cpp.com) =============================================
Received on Thursday, 8 February 2007 14:13:42 UTC