- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 23:52:38 +0000
- To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
On 03/11/2011 17:15, Costello, Roger L. wrote: > Michael Kay wrote: > >> Why do you want to use the same type to describe two things that appear >> on the surface to have quite unrelated structure? What are you hoping to >> achieve, that you could not achieve by using two completely different >> and unrelated types? > I want to categorize all elements as either an Object or a property. I think that's a semantic categorization concerning the meaning or usage of the element. As such it has nothing to do with the concept of 'type' as defined in XSD, which is a categorization according to constraints on the content of the element. This is in line with the conventional use of the term in programming languages. I think it's probably a mistake to try and use the concept of 'type' to represent an ontological distinction of this nature. If elements in an XML model correspond to concepts such as objects or properties in a UML structural model, then I would think it is appropriate to capture this provenance using custom annotations in the XSD schema. Michael Kay Saxonica
Received on Thursday, 3 November 2011 23:53:11 UTC