[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]

  • From: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@g...>
  • To: =?UTF-8?Q?Maik_St=C3=BChrenberg?= <maik.stuehrenberg@u...>
  • Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 20:57:04 +0530

Hi Maik,
    In the example you've cited below, in the first case the schema
defines 5 particles (the 5 element particles) while in the 2nd case
the schema defines only one particle (but whose cardinality is > 1,
and that is a deterministic schema to validate an XML instance
document).

If the XML document fragment was following, for example:
<b/>
<b/>
<b/>
<b/>

and if this was attempted to be validated by the Schema sequence
defined in your first case, then we should get a UPA violation (since
the XML Schema validator cannot determine that with which element
particle, the instance element should be validated).

As a side note: I think Xerces has an option to turn off UPA checking,
so you can perform a lax validation ignoring UPA concerns.

On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Maik Stührenberg
<maik.stuehrenberg@u...> wrote:
> It would be interesting to know why XSD processors do make a difference
> between
>
> <xs:element name="a">
>    <xs:complexType>
>      <xs:sequence>
>        <xs:element ref="b"/>
>        <xs:element ref="b"/>
>        <xs:element ref="b"/>
>        <xs:element ref="b" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1"/>
>        <xs:element ref="b" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1"/>
>      </xs:sequence>
>    </xs:complexType>
>  </xs:element>
>
> and
>
> <xs:element name="a">
>    <xs:complexType>
>      <xs:sequence>
>        <xs:element ref="b" minOccurs="3" maxOccurs="5"/>
>      </xs:sequence>
>    </xs:complexType>
>  </xs:element>




-- 
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]


Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member