[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- To: "Brian Speight" <bspeight@travelnow.com>,<xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] XML Schema: nillable vs. minOccurs
- From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 10:02:44 -0700
- Thread-index: AcOB8RHksgr2wlXfQJyRJSt1A/xGyQAAup6g
- Thread-topic: [xml-dev] XML Schema: nillable vs. minOccurs
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Speight [mailto:bspeight@travelnow.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 9:38 AM
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: [xml-dev] XML Schema: nillable vs. minOccurs
>
> All,
>
> I'm looking for advice on usage of nillable vs. minOccurs.
> When you have an element that is optional should you use
> "nillable=true" or "minOccurs=0" or both? Using both seems to
> make things more complicated than necessary.
I'd use minOccurs="0", nillable just complicates matters. For example,
an element can have xsi:nil="true" in the instance and still have all
its attributes.
--
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM
Flashlight batteries never die in the daylight hours.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
|
