- From: Pete Cordell <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:24:22 +0100
- To: "Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Is this related to DB (e.g. SQL) data binding? I'm not sure it has a big influence on OOP (JAVA/C++) data binding. Pete Cordell Codalogic For XML C++ data binding visit http://www.codalogic.com/lmx/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Kay" To: "'Pete Cordell'" > I think the rule was always there because schema was intended for more > than > validation, e.g. for data binding applications, where assignment of types > is > important. > > Michael Kay > http://www.saxonica.com/ > >> -----Original Message----- >> I was just wondering why schema has the rules about "Schema Component >> Constraint: Element Declarations Consistent". i.e. if two >> elements in the same complex type have the same name, then >> they have to have the same type. >> Surely if the association of element information items to >> particles is unambiguous and someone wants to declare: >> >> <xs:sequence> >> <xs:element name='a' type='xs:int'/> >> <xs:element name='a' type='xs:string'/> >> </xs:sequence> >> >> then how does it break XML or schema to allow them to do it? >> I can see that this might be a problem for XSLT processing, >> and as such such a schema design could be deemed practice, >> but is that schemas problem? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Pete Cordell >> Codalogic >> For XML C++ data binding visit http://www.codalogic.com/lmx/
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2008 16:25:07 UTC