Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 10:00 am +0000 18/2/05, Paul Spencer wrote: >I have been trying to work with a set of published schemas that use >substitution groups and found that the schemas themselves were not valid. So >I started looking at other published schemas that use them and found that >these were also not accepted by one or more XML processors (I tried Xerces, >MSXML and .NET) or used some very complex work-arounds. > >Are substitution groups practical when the head of the group is in a >different schema document from the members of the group? The scenario is >this: This is the way XBRL works - the 'item' head is defined in the generic XBRL instance Schema document, and members of the item substitution group (representing actual financial facts) are defined in the Taxonomy Schema. An <import> of the instance Schema in the Taxonomy Schema does the trick... or is there something more subtle about your scenario concerning type derivation that I'm missing? -- Andy Greener Mob: +44 7836 331933 GID Ltd, Reading, UK Tel: +44 118 956 1248 andy@g... Fax: +44 118 958 9005
|
