• To: "'Chiusano Joseph'" <chiusano_joseph@b...>,"'Niels Peter Strandberg'" <nielspeter@n...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: XML schema cos-nonambig problem
• From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
• Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:11:01 -0000
• In-reply-to: <74B14CBC0FEB9D4EB16969F09FA51F45B2F71B@M...>
• Thread-index: AcYCXPWA/+sYo8etRgKw/e3CjvQTfAAAa3wgAAEyZhA=

> However, if the complex type were changed to look as
> follows:
> 
> > >>       <xs:complexType name="contentiddef">
> > >> 		<xs:choice>
> > >> 			<xs:choice minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded">
> > >> 				<xs:element ref="x:externalid"/>
> > >> 				<xs:element ref="x:major"/>
> > >> 			</xs:choice>
> > >> 			<xs:choice minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded">
> > >> 				<xs:element ref="x:major"/>
> > >> 				<xs:element ref="x:minor"/>
> > >> 				<xs:element ref="x:version"/>
> > >> 			</xs:choice>
> > >> 		</xs:choice>
> > >> 	</xs:complexType>
> 
> the XML schema processor would know which choice set it is in when it
> encounters a "major" element because if it first encountered an
> "externalID" element (which must remain mandatory - as it is 
> above - in
> order for this to work) it knows that it must be in the first choice
> set; otherwise, it must be in the second.

I don't think so. The model here is ((e|ma)* | (ma|mi|v)*), and content
consisting of a single "ma" element would match either branch.

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

• References:
  • RE: XML schema cos-nonambig problem
    • From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@b...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML schema cos-nonambig problem (solved)
• Next by Date: Re: XML schema cos-nonambig problem
• Previous by thread: RE: XML schema cos-nonambig problem
• Next by thread: Re: XML schema cos-nonambig problem
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread