- From: Pete Cordell <petexmldev@tech-know-ware.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 22:50:20 +0100
- To: "Boris Kolpackov" <boris@codesynthesis.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
----- Original Message From: "Boris Kolpackov" <...> > Hi, > > Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com> writes: > >> Well it's a matter of taste, but if you use the venetian blind style >> of schema then you wouldn't use element ref="" much, but @type >> instead, eg: >> >> <xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"> >> >> <xs:element name="part" type="part"/> >> >> <xs:complexType name="part"> >> <xs:sequence> >> <xs:element name="part" type="part" minOccurs="0" >> maxOccurs="unbounded"/> >> </xs:sequence> >> <xs:attribute name="serial" type="xs:string"/> >> </xs:complexType> >> >> </xs:schema> > > Note that this change will result in a different schema if there > was a target namespace involved. In the original example, both > elements are qualified while in this schema the global one would > be qualified while the local one wouldn't. Although, just to clarify for those that are a bit fuzzy about namespaces in schema, commonly if people define a schema that specifies a target namespace, 9 times out of 10 they will also make elementFormDefault="qualified". Hence all elements will end up qualified and the same result can be achieved. Pete. -- ============================================= Pete Cordell Tech-Know-Ware Ltd for XML Schema to C++ data binding visit http://www.tech-know-ware.com/lmx/ http://www.codalogic.com/lmx/ =============================================
Received on Thursday, 17 May 2007 22:07:17 UTC