- From: Pete Cordell <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:35:46 +0100
- To: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>
- Cc: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Can't believe they didn't fix the restrictions on xs:all in XSD 1.1!!!!!! :-( Pete Cordell Codalogic Ltd Twitter: http://twitter.com/petecordell Interface XML to C++ the easy way using C++ XML data binding to convert XSD schemas to C++ classes. Visit http://codalogic.com/lmx/ or http://www.xml2cpp.com for more info ----- Original Message ----- From: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com> To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 3:18 PM Subject: Re: Order indicators in the .xsd file > At 2012-10-16 15:13 -0700, Fred Li wrote: >>Hi XML experts, >> >>I have a problem about the use of order indicators in the creation of >>XML schema (.xsd file). As I learned from W3School >>(http://www.w3schools.com/schema/schema_complex_indicators.asp), we >>have 3 order indicators in the XML Schema language: >> >>All - the child elements can appear in any order, and each child >>element must occur only once >>Choice - either one child element or another can occur >>Sequence - the child elements must appear in a specific order >> >>I have an element (for example <asset>) that has 23 child elements, >>three of them can have more than 1 instances, and 7 of them are >>required (includes the 3 have more than 1 instances). According to the >>definition of the order indicators, "sequence" is the only indicator I >>can use in the XML schema, but I hope there is no order restriction >>for the appearance of 23 child elements. Do you have any ideas to >>solve this problem? > > Theoretically, you could choose to express every possible permutation in a > big choice, but it would be untenable to develop and to maintain. I think > in W3C Schema 1.0 this is the only way. > > Using W3C Schema 1.1 I think you could just allow any number of all of > them and then assert the cardinality of the ones that have restrictions: > > <xs:choice minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"> > <xs:element ref="a"/> > <xs:element ref="b"/> > <xs:element ref="c"/> > <xs:element ref="d"/> > <xs:element ref="e"/> > <xs:element ref="f"/> > <xs:element ref="g"/> > <xs:element ref="h"/> > <xs:element ref="i"/> > <xs:element ref="j"/> > <xs:element ref="k"/> > <xs:element ref="l"/> > <xs:element ref="m"/> > <xs:element ref="n"/> > <xs:element ref="o"/> > <xs:element ref="p"/> > <xs:element ref="q"/> > <xs:element ref="r"/> > <xs:element ref="s"/> > <xs:element ref="t"/> > <xs:element ref="u"/> > <xs:element ref="v"/> > <xs:element ref="w"/> > <xs:assert test=" > count(a) > 1 and count(a) < 4 and count(b) > 1 and count(b) < 4 > and > count(c) > 1 and count(c) < 4 and count(d) = 1 and count(e) = 1 > and > count(f) = 1 and count(g) = 1 and count(h) < 2 and count(i) < 2 > and > count(j) < 2 and count(k) < 2 and count(l) < 2 and > count(m) < 2 and count(n) < 2 and count(o) < 2 and > count(p) < 2 and count(q) < 2 and count(r) < 2 and > count(s) < 2 and count(t) < 2 and count(u) < 2 and > count(v) < 2 and count(w) < 2"/> > </xs:choice> > > An alternative answer is not to use W3C Schema and to use the "interleave" > modeling semantic in ISO/IEC 19757-2 RELAX-NG where you can express the > following in the compact syntax: > > ( a & a? & a? & b & b? & b? & c & c? & c? & d & e & f & g & h? & > i? & j? & k? & l? & m? & n? & o? & p? & q? & r? & s? & t? & u? & v? & > w? ) > > You can see that the end result requires one of a through g (the 7 > required constructs), up to 3 of each of a, b and c, and the rest are all > optional. The > interleave allows them to show up in any order at all. > > I hope this helps. > > . . . . . . . . . Ken > > -- > Contact us for world-wide XML consulting and instructor-led training > Free 5-hour lecture: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/links/udemy.htm > Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/x/ > G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com > Google+ profile: https://plus.google.com/116832879756988317389/about > Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal > >
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2012 14:36:00 UTC