- From: Arshad Noor <arshad.noor@strongauth.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 17:14:26 -0700
- To: lists@fgeorges.org
- CC: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Thanks to all for the suggestions. I have modified my schema accordingly and no longer receive the error. Arshad Noor StrongAuth, Inc. Florent Georges wrote: > Arshad Noor wrote: > > Hi, > >> Since I can only have a Symkey, SymkeyError or a combination >> of both in the to-be-defined element, why does NB think there >> will be ambiguity? > > Because when it will encounter a Symkey, it will be not possible to > know in the choice if this is the Symkey from the Symkey alternative, > or from the group alternative. > >> How do I go about accomplishing what I want? > > The idiomatic solution is to use a choice on Symkey and optional > SymkeyError, or just a SymkeyError: > > <xs:choice> > <xs:sequence> > <xs:element ref="Symkey"/> > <xs:element ref="SymkeyError" minOccurs="0"/> > </xs:sequence> > <xs:sequence> > <xs:element ref="SymkeyError"/> > </xs:sequence> > </xs:choice> > > For more information, look for "UPA" or "UPA violation". > > Regards, > > --drkm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _____________________________________________________________________________ > Envoyez avec Yahoo! Mail. Une boite mail plus intelligente http://mail.yahoo.fr
Received on Tuesday, 24 June 2008 00:15:27 UTC