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
Fax: +44 118 958 9005
