Home » Archived » XML Schema Definition (XSD) » XSDSimpleFinal has no EXTENSION
XSDSimpleFinal has no EXTENSION [message #48834] |
Fri, 09 July 2004 06:07 ![Go to next message Go to next message](theme/Solstice/images/down.png) |
Eclipse User![Friend of Eclipse Friend](/donate/web-api/friends_decorator.php?email=) |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: jtaylor.nextance.com
The XSDSimpleFinal class has no value for "extension", but if I'm reading
the W3C spec correctly, it indicates that this is one of the valid values.
Also, to test whether or not xsdSimpleTypeDefinition.getLexicalFinal()
contains XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL, do I need to test for both
XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL and XSDSimpleFinal.ALL_LITERAL?
Thanks,
James
|
|
|
Re: XSDSimpleFinal has no EXTENSION [message #48893 is a reply to message #48834] |
Mon, 12 July 2004 12:09 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/Solstice/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](theme/Solstice/images/down.png) |
Eclipse User![Friend of Eclipse Friend](/donate/web-api/friends_decorator.php?email=) |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: merks.ca.ibm.com
--------------54BA90BAFCDBB4D665BCE2D2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
James,
There may have been some errata about this, but the definition I see
(http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#defn-final) only has this:
final = (#all | (list | union | restriction)
and this:
{final}
A subset of {restriction, list, union}.
You should probably be checking if getFinal contains RESTRICTION; if you check
getLexicalFinal, you'll have to look for ALL as well.
James Taylor wrote:
> The XSDSimpleFinal class has no value for "extension", but if I'm reading
> the W3C spec correctly, it indicates that this is one of the valid values.
>
> Also, to test whether or not xsdSimpleTypeDefinition.getLexicalFinal()
> contains XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL, do I need to test for both
> XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL and XSDSimpleFinal.ALL_LITERAL?
>
> Thanks,
>
> James
--------------54BA90BAFCDBB4D665BCE2D2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
James,
<p>There may have been some errata about this, but the definition I see
(<A HREF="http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#defn-final">http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#defn-final</A>) only has this:
<blockquote>final = (#all | (list | union | restriction)
<br> </blockquote>
and this:
<blockquote>{final}
<br>A subset of {restriction, list, union}.
<br> </blockquote>
You should probably be checking if getFinal contains RESTRICTION; if you
check getLexicalFinal, you'll have to look for ALL as well.
<br>
<p>James Taylor wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>The XSDSimpleFinal class has no value for "extension",
but if I'm reading
<br>the W3C spec correctly, it indicates that this is one of the valid
values.
<p>Also, to test whether or not xsdSimpleTypeDefinition.getLexicalFinal()
<br>contains XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL, do I need to test for
both
<br>XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL and XSDSimpleFinal.ALL_LITERAL?
<p>Thanks,
<p> James</blockquote>
</html>
--------------54BA90BAFCDBB4D665BCE2D2--
|
|
|
Re: XSDSimpleFinal has no EXTENSION [message #49616 is a reply to message #48893] |
Tue, 27 July 2004 19:12 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/Solstice/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](theme/Solstice/images/down.png) |
Eclipse User![Friend of Eclipse Friend](/donate/web-api/friends_decorator.php?email=) |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: jtaylor.nextance.com
Ed,
I was looking at XML Schema Part 1: Structures
( http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-1-20010502/#Simple_T ype_Definitions),
which lists the following possible options for a Simple Type Definition:
{final}
A subset of {extension, list, restriction, union}.
Seems like there's a conflict?
James
Ed Merks wrote:
> James,
> There may have been some errata about this, but the definition I see
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#defn-final) only has this:
> final = (#all | (list | union | restriction)
> and this:
> {final}
> A subset of {restriction, list, union}.
> You should probably be checking if getFinal contains RESTRICTION; if you
check
> getLexicalFinal, you'll have to look for ALL as well.
> James Taylor wrote:
> > The XSDSimpleFinal class has no value for "extension", but if I'm reading
> > the W3C spec correctly, it indicates that this is one of the valid values.
> >
> > Also, to test whether or not xsdSimpleTypeDefinition.getLexicalFinal()
> > contains XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL, do I need to test for both
> > XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL and XSDSimpleFinal.ALL_LITERAL?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > James
|
|
|
Re: XSDSimpleFinal has no EXTENSION [message #49645 is a reply to message #49616] |
Wed, 28 July 2004 13:03 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/Solstice/images/up.png) |
Eclipse User![Friend of Eclipse Friend](/donate/web-api/friends_decorator.php?email=) |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: merks.ca.ibm.com
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------040903030303060809040200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
James,
Yes, it is contradictory. If the syntax doesn't allow "extension" then
it's hard to imagine how the property can be populated with an
"extension" value. I'm not sure how the errata resolved this issue...
James Taylor wrote:
>Ed,
>
>I was looking at XML Schema Part 1: Structures
>( http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-1-20010502/#Simple_T ype_Definitions),
>which lists the following possible options for a Simple Type Definition:
>
>{final}
>A subset of {extension, list, restriction, union}.
>
>Seems like there's a conflict?
>
> James
>
>Ed Merks wrote:
>
>
>
>>James,
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>There may have been some errata about this, but the definition I see
>>(http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#defn-final) only has this:
>>
>>
>
>
>
>> final = (#all | (list | union | restriction)
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>>and this:
>>
>>
>
>
>
>> {final}
>> A subset of {restriction, list, union}.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>>You should probably be checking if getFinal contains RESTRICTION; if you
>>
>>
>check
>
>
>>getLexicalFinal, you'll have to look for ALL as well.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>>James Taylor wrote:
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>>The XSDSimpleFinal class has no value for "extension", but if I'm reading
>>>the W3C spec correctly, it indicates that this is one of the valid values.
>>>
>>>Also, to test whether or not xsdSimpleTypeDefinition.getLexicalFinal()
>>>contains XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL, do I need to test for both
>>>XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL and XSDSimpleFinal.ALL_LITERAL?
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
--------------040903030303060809040200
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-15"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
James,<br>
<br>
Yes, it is contradictory.
|
|
|
Re: XSDSimpleFinal has no EXTENSION [message #589683 is a reply to message #48834] |
Mon, 12 July 2004 12:09 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/Solstice/images/up.png) |
Ed Merks![Friend of Eclipse Friend](/donate/web-api/friends_decorator.php?email=ed.merks%40gmail.com) Messages: 33205 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
--------------54BA90BAFCDBB4D665BCE2D2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
James,
There may have been some errata about this, but the definition I see
(http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#defn-final) only has this:
final = (#all | (list | union | restriction)
and this:
{final}
A subset of {restriction, list, union}.
You should probably be checking if getFinal contains RESTRICTION; if you check
getLexicalFinal, you'll have to look for ALL as well.
James Taylor wrote:
> The XSDSimpleFinal class has no value for "extension", but if I'm reading
> the W3C spec correctly, it indicates that this is one of the valid values.
>
> Also, to test whether or not xsdSimpleTypeDefinition.getLexicalFinal()
> contains XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL, do I need to test for both
> XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL and XSDSimpleFinal.ALL_LITERAL?
>
> Thanks,
>
> James
--------------54BA90BAFCDBB4D665BCE2D2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
James,
<p>There may have been some errata about this, but the definition I see
(<A HREF="http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#defn-final">http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#defn-final</A>) only has this:
<blockquote>final = (#all | (list | union | restriction)
<br> </blockquote>
and this:
<blockquote>{final}
<br>A subset of {restriction, list, union}.
<br> </blockquote>
You should probably be checking if getFinal contains RESTRICTION; if you
check getLexicalFinal, you'll have to look for ALL as well.
<br>
<p>James Taylor wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>The XSDSimpleFinal class has no value for "extension",
but if I'm reading
<br>the W3C spec correctly, it indicates that this is one of the valid
values.
<p>Also, to test whether or not xsdSimpleTypeDefinition.getLexicalFinal()
<br>contains XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL, do I need to test for
both
<br>XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL and XSDSimpleFinal.ALL_LITERAL?
<p>Thanks,
<p> James</blockquote>
</html>
--------------54BA90BAFCDBB4D665BCE2D2--
Ed Merks
Professional Support: https://www.macromodeling.com/
|
|
|
Re: XSDSimpleFinal has no EXTENSION [message #589941 is a reply to message #48893] |
Tue, 27 July 2004 19:12 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/Solstice/images/up.png) |
James Taylor![Friend of Eclipse Friend](/donate/web-api/friends_decorator.php?email=deepa%40nextance.com) Messages: 21 Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Ed,
I was looking at XML Schema Part 1: Structures
( http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-1-20010502/#Simple_T ype_Definitions),
which lists the following possible options for a Simple Type Definition:
{final}
A subset of {extension, list, restriction, union}.
Seems like there's a conflict?
James
Ed Merks wrote:
> James,
> There may have been some errata about this, but the definition I see
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#defn-final) only has this:
> final = (#all | (list | union | restriction)
> and this:
> {final}
> A subset of {restriction, list, union}.
> You should probably be checking if getFinal contains RESTRICTION; if you
check
> getLexicalFinal, you'll have to look for ALL as well.
> James Taylor wrote:
> > The XSDSimpleFinal class has no value for "extension", but if I'm reading
> > the W3C spec correctly, it indicates that this is one of the valid values.
> >
> > Also, to test whether or not xsdSimpleTypeDefinition.getLexicalFinal()
> > contains XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL, do I need to test for both
> > XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL and XSDSimpleFinal.ALL_LITERAL?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > James
|
|
|
Re: XSDSimpleFinal has no EXTENSION [message #589949 is a reply to message #49616] |
Wed, 28 July 2004 13:03 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/Solstice/images/up.png) |
Ed Merks![Friend of Eclipse Friend](/donate/web-api/friends_decorator.php?email=ed.merks%40gmail.com) Messages: 33205 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------040903030303060809040200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
James,
Yes, it is contradictory. If the syntax doesn't allow "extension" then
it's hard to imagine how the property can be populated with an
"extension" value. I'm not sure how the errata resolved this issue...
James Taylor wrote:
>Ed,
>
>I was looking at XML Schema Part 1: Structures
>( http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-1-20010502/#Simple_T ype_Definitions),
>which lists the following possible options for a Simple Type Definition:
>
>{final}
>A subset of {extension, list, restriction, union}.
>
>Seems like there's a conflict?
>
> James
>
>Ed Merks wrote:
>
>
>
>>James,
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>There may have been some errata about this, but the definition I see
>>(http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#defn-final) only has this:
>>
>>
>
>
>
>> final = (#all | (list | union | restriction)
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>>and this:
>>
>>
>
>
>
>> {final}
>> A subset of {restriction, list, union}.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>>You should probably be checking if getFinal contains RESTRICTION; if you
>>
>>
>check
>
>
>>getLexicalFinal, you'll have to look for ALL as well.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>>James Taylor wrote:
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>>The XSDSimpleFinal class has no value for "extension", but if I'm reading
>>>the W3C spec correctly, it indicates that this is one of the valid values.
>>>
>>>Also, to test whether or not xsdSimpleTypeDefinition.getLexicalFinal()
>>>contains XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL, do I need to test for both
>>>XSDSimpleFinal.RESTRICTION_LITERAL and XSDSimpleFinal.ALL_LITERAL?
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
--------------040903030303060809040200
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-15"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
James,<br>
<br>
Yes, it is contradictory.
Ed Merks
Professional Support: https://www.macromodeling.com/
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Aug 31 23:13:35 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04099 seconds
|