OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: XML Schemas: ref'ing vs inlining

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • From: Martin Bryan <mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com>
  • To: Curt Arnold <CurtA@techie.com>, xml-dev@lists.xml.org
  • Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 20:01:41 +0100

But Curt

> Martin Bryan wrote:
> > am I right in inferring that a  valid XML content model of (a, b, c, b) cannot be expressed using a schema?
> No, the constraint that was quoted is on the top-level declarations in a
> schema.  It is saying you can't do:

it also says that they apply to  model group definitions, e.g to sequence and all. Hence my query about the wording of:

> 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}.  

Model group definitions are odd-balls.  For any or all you want the rule to apply, but for sequence you definitely do not. Hence my great concern.



News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS