- From: King, Jeffrey (Mission Systems) <Jeff.King@ngc.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 11:34:12 -0600
- To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Thanks for the analogy-- I see your point. I guess that's why XML Schema 1.0 doesn't allow it. I my case, I guess the way to avoid this from a design standpoint is to get rid of the common generalized element names and use the data that I currently have in the attributes for the element names. However, it seems that if I do it that way then my "word" type and "field" type go away, and I think there is value in having those "types". Jeffrey King Northrop Grumman (703) 561-4965 -----Original Message----- From: Nassar, Anthony [mailto:ANassar@HPTI.com] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 11:12 AM To: King, Jeffrey (Mission Systems); xmlschema-dev@w3.org Subject: RE: Repeating elements with fixed attribute values You wouldn't expect a programming language to allow you declare a type "word" that aggregates a collection of "field" objects, but the data in the latter can only be what the type declaration allows (or, reducing it even more, you wouldn't expect to be able to declare an array type *and* declare what values have to be at certain locations). On that analogy, anyway, the design you're proposing is trying to accomplish two unrelated things.
Received on Friday, 4 January 2008 17:34:25 UTC