• To: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson),Dan Vint <dvint@m...>
• Subject: Re: simple or complexContent?
• From: Dan Vint <dvint@m...>
• Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 15:56:07 -0700
• Cc: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <f5b65pf1qz6.fsf@e...>
• References: <5.1.0.14.2.20030415120027.02ee6c48@m...><5.1.0.14.2.20030415101337.02c73038@m...><342F6DED4DF4D511AA5A00B0D079FEE3023819FC@MAYA><342F6DED4DF4D511AA5A00B0D079FEE3023819FC@MAYA><5.1.0.14.2.20030415101337.02c73038@m...><5.1.0.14.2.20030415120027.02ee6c48@m...>

At 08:49 PM 4/15/2003 +0100, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
>XSV is happy with those definitions -- what exactly is the form of the
>complaint?
>
>ht
>--
>   Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh

Xerces-J and MS-XML parser also have no problems with this either.

The basic error message from XML Spy v5.3 is

"SimpleContent cannot have a base that is a ComplexType."

For Spy this error is view dependant. In the Design view with validation 
nothing is reported but go to the Grid and maybe Text view and they will 
report the error.

And it is the .Net XSD wrapper class generator that I have had reported to 
me as having the same issue with this particular item.

What makes them happy is to change the simpleContent to complexContent.

Thanks for the help, now to convince my users that everything is OK!

..dan

• References:
  • Re: simple or complexContent?
    • From: Dan Vint <dvint@m...>
  • simple or complexContent?
    • From: Dan Vint <dvint@m...>
  • redefining enumeration?
    • From: Prasad G S K <prasadg@a...>
  • Re: simple or complexContent?
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• Prev by Date: I am amazed!
• Next by Date: Re: The Zen of xml-dev (was Re: Draft US Government policyon XML Namespaces)
• Previous by thread: Re: simple or complexContent?
• Next by thread: RE: Whoops too much (was Re: Property dependency checking)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread