Re: Basic XMLSchema questions
> > > > Syntactically it appears to be legal to simply have <type> on it's own, Sorry, I meant to say <type name='xxx'>, I'm pretty clear on type now. Thanks very much. You may have missed another question in a previous email.... At one point you had made a critical remark regarding XML schema to model a class... "Your schema is one-to-one with a Java class? This wouldn't be a good idea, unless I'm misunderstanding your intent. Maybe your _XML_ is based on a class, and it specifies the class, but then multiple XML docs (therefore multiple classes) all use the same Schema." Originally, this is what I was trying to use an XML Schema to do (that is: store class info), and use an XML document to store instance values. (Sort of a simplified XMI) I'm not sure I can do this, in any manner that doesn't break XML schemas. There doesn't appear to be a mechanism in place to expand the functionality of XML-Schemas But if it is possible, I'm interested in why you feel this is a bad idea? (BTW, I think this is similar to what was done with Quick) Finally, . thanks, alan xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; unsubscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format