Schema 1.1: xs:anyEnumeration considered?

[brycenesbitt]

The original poster (that's me) was drawing an analogy between Java and
XML, perhaps a little unfair.  In the Java world packages outside the
core get an "x" in their name (for "experimental" or "extended") until
they are eventually folded into the core.

For XML enums it might look like this.  Imagine an enumeration
containing "schwinn", "huffy" and "specialized", then:

    <vendor>specialized</vendor>
    <vendor>heffy</vendor>
    <vendor>Schwinn</vendor>
    <vendor enum_extension="true">breezer</vendor>

when validated "heffy" would be invalid, but "breezer" is clearly marked
as existing outside the predefined list of bicycle manufacturers.



Pete Cordell wrote:
>
> Gee, thanks.  Believe it or not I had already tried that, but it didn't
> actually give me any additional insight into what the OP was suggesting.
> About as useful as suggesting:
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=computer+science&btnG=Google+Search

[Michael Kay]

This sounds like just another example of conditional type assignment:

type="if (@enum_extension) then xs:string else my:enumerated-type"

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmlschema-dev-request@...
> [mailto:xmlschema-dev-request@...] On Behalf Of Bryce Nesbitt
> Sent: 02 May 2007 20:08
> To: xmlschema-dev@...
> Cc: Pete Cordell; Chuck Herrick
> Subject: Re: Schema 1.1: xs:anyEnumeration considered?
>
>
> The original poster (that's me) was drawing an analogy
> between Java and XML, perhaps a little unfair.  In the Java
> world packages outside the core get an "x" in their name (for
> "experimental" or "extended") until they are eventually
> folded into the core.
>
> For XML enums it might look like this.  Imagine an
> enumeration containing "schwinn", "huffy" and "specialized", then:
>
>     <vendor>specialized</vendor>
>     <vendor>heffy</vendor>
>     <vendor>Schwinn</vendor>
>     <vendor enum_extension="true">breezer</vendor>
>
> when validated "heffy" would be invalid, but "breezer" is
> clearly marked as existing outside the predefined list of
> bicycle manufacturers.
>
>
>
> Pete Cordell wrote:
> >
> > Gee, thanks.  Believe it or not I had already tried that, but it
> > didn't actually give me any additional insight into what
> the OP was suggesting.
> > About as useful as suggesting:
> >
> >
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=computer+science&btnG=Google+Sear
> > ch
>
>

[Pete Cordell]

Thanks for the clarification.  I'm afraid I'm still working out what
conclusions to draw!!!

Pete.
--
=============================================
Pete Cordell
Tech-Know-Ware Ltd
for XML Schema to C++ data binding visit
 http://www.tech-know-ware.com/lmx/
 http://www.codalogic.com/lmx/
=============================================

----- Original Message From: "Bryce Nesbitt"

>
> The original poster (that's me) was drawing an analogy between Java and
> XML, perhaps a little unfair.  In the Java world packages outside the
> core get an "x" in their name (for "experimental" or "extended") until
> they are eventually folded into the core.
>
> For XML enums it might look like this.  Imagine an enumeration
> containing "schwinn", "huffy" and "specialized", then:
>
>    <vendor>specialized</vendor>
>    <vendor>heffy</vendor>
>    <vendor>Schwinn</vendor>
>    <vendor enum_extension="true">breezer</vendor>
>
> when validated "heffy" would be invalid, but "breezer" is clearly marked
> as existing outside the predefined list of bicycle manufacturers.
>
>
>
> Pete Cordell wrote:
>>
>> Gee, thanks.  Believe it or not I had already tried that, but it didn't
>> actually give me any additional insight into what the OP was suggesting.
>> About as useful as suggesting:
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=computer+science&btnG=Google+Search
>
>
>