dss-x — archive

[Ernst Jan van Nigtevecht]

Hi, I second your proposal to accept the ordering/sequence of xml elements. XML is not json and vice versa :-) so I expect that xml developers will benefit from a more straightforward structure... Regards Ernst Jan Andreas Kuehne schreef: > Hi again, > > I would like to propose a solution for the schema glitch. > The cause for all the trouble is my attempt to introduce independence of > element ordering (as it is build-in in JSON) in the XML schema, too. > Tried to solve this using choices wrapped in sequences. But this results > in additional problems (like the ones Juan Carlos pointed out or > alternatively in the loss of cardinality restrictions). Recommendations > on this 'non-ordering' topic involve not applicable elements (xs:all) or > madly complex constructs using additional groups based on their cardinality. > > So I would to tend to accept the ordering of sequences in XML schema and > stop trying to bend it until it somehow mimics JSON schema. > > What's your opinion in this? > > Greetings, > > Andreas > >> Hi all, >> >> >> I have to admit that Juan Carlos pointed out two severe cardinality >> flaws in the XML schema regarding InputDocuments and OptionalIn- and >> -OutputTypes. I'm a bit upset that my test cases didn't detect these >> problem upfront and need to track down this issue. >> >> Other comments were also quite interesting but not of that severity. >> But as far as I unde3rstood the process we need to fix the problem and >> start the review period again. >> >> >> Greetings, >> >> >> Andreas >> >> >