Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
>> All that is required is that the two 'b' elements have the same type. Excellent. Part 1, Section 3.7, talks about this, "when two or more element declarations with the same identity occur at any level within a model group, their type definitions must be the same" 'must be same' is a strong phrase. But, in my reading I found that the schema specs do not talk about 'equality of types'. If the processor does not know anything about equality of types, how would it prove that these two type definitions are the same. Hence, I infer that it is impossible to create such a valid model. I am willing to listen. Thank you for your help. Ninggang -----Original Message----- From: Henry S. Thompson [mailto:ht@c...] Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 11:12 AM To: Martin Bryan Cc: xml-dev@l... Subject: Re: XML Schemas: ref'ing vs inlining "Martin Bryan" <mtbryan@s...> writes: > From > > > > Section 5.13 (schema constraints): > > > > 2 Each of the {type definitions}, {element declarations}, {attribute > > group definitions}, {model group definitions} and {notation > > declarations} must not contain two or more schema components with the > > same {name} and {target namespace}. > > am I right in inferring that a valid XML content model of (a, b, c, b) cannot be expressed using a schema? Don't panic! Of course you can have such content models. All that is required is that the two 'b' elements have the same type. ht -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@c... URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
|
