Re: [tdwg-tapir] Is the current schema valid?
Renato, Honetly I dont really understand the validation error, but it has to do with the all group for sure:
""" E cos-all-limited.1.2: An 'all' model group must appear in a particle with '{'min occurs'}' = '{'max occurs'}' = 1, and that particle must be part of a pair which constitutes the '{'content type'}' of a complex type definition. """
I therefore have replaced the all with a sequence and the schema validates again. I also raised the schema version to 1.01 which we never did before. I think we should really do so while remaining the namespace under http://rs.tdwg.org/tapir/1.0
cheers
Markus
Am 31.07.2007 19:00 Uhr schrieb "Renato De Giovanni" unter renato@cria.org.br:
Hi Markus,
Would you like to try to make the schema valid again? (I don't use oxygen here). Or should we just replace xsd:all by xsd:sequence?
Thanks,
Renato
On 31 Jul 2007 at 17:31, Döring, Markus wrote:
Renato, Afaik oxygen is using xerces for validation - which is a very good parser/validator. Not sure if the w3c xsv validator is more trustable, but I feel very uncomfortable if xerces doesnt validate the schema.
Markus
Hi Markus,
Thanks. I just took the liberty to move the element definitions to their original xsd:sequence.
Now all implementations need to make sure that they advertise the variables in the same order.
About the minor version, that's fine if we manually update them, although I would prefer to automate the process (maybe using svn revision?). Anyway, now it's 1.0.2, and at this point we should really not expect frequent changes.
Best Regards, -- Renato
Renato, Honetly I dont really understand the validation error, but it has to do with the all group for sure:
""" E cos-all-limited.1.2: An 'all' model group must appear in a particle with '{'min occurs'}' = '{'max occurs'}' = 1, and that particle must be part of a pair which constitutes the '{'content type'}' of a complex type definition. """
I therefore have replaced the all with a sequence and the schema validates again. I also raised the schema version to 1.01 which we never did before. I think we should really do so while remaining the namespace under http://rs.tdwg.org/tapir/1.0
cheers
Markus
participants (2)
-
Döring, Markus
-
Renato De Giovanni