HI Noah,

Thanks for the response. I completely agree with you.
But is there a possiblity of revisiting the "xsd:all" semantics in the near
future.
i.e. either nuking it, and thus enforcing order always.
     OR
     removing just the restriction on the member cardinalities in the "all"
compositor.

rgds,
Menon


 On 2/23/06, noah_mendelsohn@u... <noah_mendelsohn@u... > wrote=
:
>
> Ramakumar Menon asks:
>
> > Apart from being a best practice, cd somebody tell me atleast five
> advantages of enforcing order of elements within an XSD.
>
> Sure.  XML is intended for document scenarios as well as data.  Consider:
>
> <element name="chapter">
>        <sequence>
>                <element ref="chapterHeading"/>
>                <element ref="paragraph" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>                <element ref="chapterFootnotes"/>
>        </sequence>
> </element>
>
> It may be very important, or at least semantically significant, that the
> chapterHeading comes ahead of the paragraphs, and that the
> chapterFootnotes follow.  Furthermore, it's clearly important that the XM=
L
> Infoset guarantees that the order of the paragraphs is preserved, if ther=
e
> is more than one paragraph.
>
> Keep in mind that XML Schema is made for documents and data together, and
> that is part of its power.  That may seem like excess complexity if you'r=
e
> just defining lists of part numbers, but then you may one day find that
> you want to include XHTML descriptions for those parts, and suddenly the
> fact that order is significant starts to make sense.
>
> --------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn
> IBM Corporation
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> 1-617-693-4036
> --------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>


--
Shift to the left, shift to the right!
Pop up, push down, byte, byte, byte!

-Ramkumar Menon
A typical Macroprocessor


--
Shift to the left, shift to the right!
Pop up, push down, byte, byte, byte!

-Ramkumar Menon
A typical Macroprocessor