I don't think this can work.  It doesn't feel instinctively right (not that
my XML instincts are particularly good!).  The mian problem though is that I
don't know what all of the possible values are.  I might have a Value1002 or
Value27649 etc.  How do I represent this in a schema?

I'm surprised this is so difficult.  I would have thought that a schema that
said "Many values allowed but at least one of them must be blahblah" isn't
such an unusual request??

Piers


"Martin SChukrazy" <prak24@h...> wrote in message
news:403f9be0$0$3097$61fed72c@n......
> One suggestion is to change the
> <Value>5</Value>
> to a
> <Value5>...</Value5>
> That way you can have multiple values i.e. each value is equal to an
element
> and hence write a DTD/Schema that makes it conform to your rules defined
> below...
>
>
> "Piers Chivers" <Piers.Chivers@_...> wrote in message
> news:c1ldri$9p5$1@h......
> > Hi,
> > I have XML like
> >
> > <SomeElement>
> >     <Value>5</Value>
> >     <Value>3</Value>
> >     <Value>7</Value>
> > </SomeElement>
> >
> > I want to define the schema to say that the <Value>s must contain at
least
> > one of a number of known values, and may contain some other <Value>s.
For
> > example, if the known <Value>s were 3 and 5 then the above is valid.
> Also,
> >
> > <SomeElement>
> >     <Value>5</Value>
> >     <Value>1</Value>
> > </SomeElement>
> >
> > AND
> >
> > <SomeElement>
> >       <Value>3<Value>
> > </SomeElement>
> >
> > are valid because they contain one of (3 and 5).  But
> >
> > <SomeElement>
> >     <Value>8</Value>
> > </SomeElement>
> >
> > is not valid.  I've tried defining this using xs:all and enumerations
but
> > with no luck.  All suggestions gratefully received.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Piers
> >
> >
>
>