- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 22:35:23 +0100
- To: "'Willi Weichselbaumer'" <williweichselbaumer@hotmail.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 29 May 2007 21:35:27 UTC
You can define these types using list or union in the way I suggested. You don't need to redefine the schema types to achieve this. These types are different types, in a different namespace, that can be defined in their own schema. I think the XForms draft is pretty defective in the way these types are defined (the XSLT/XQuery groups have raised a formal comment saying so) but there's nothing to stop you defining them. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/ _____ From: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org [mailto:xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Willi Weichselbaumer Sent: 29 May 2007 21:59 To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org Subject: RE: redefining base element integer Hi Michael, I was trying to make my own style sheet to allow for the XForms data types that allow empty content, therefore extending the XML definition. http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xforms11-20061103/#empty-content-types Do you have any other ideas? Thanks, Willi _____ Explore the seven wonders of the world Learn more! <http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=7+wonders+world&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE>
Received on Tuesday, 29 May 2007 21:35:27 UTC