Here is one URL:
  http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=javax&btnG=Google+Search

>
> I'm not familiar with this.  Do you have a URL I can look at?
>
> Thanks,
>
> 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: "brycenesbitt" <bryce1@o...>
> To: <xmlschema-dev@w...>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 12:59 AM
> Subject: Re: Schema 1.1: xs:anyEnumeration considered?
>
>
> >
> >
> > How about something akin to "javax".  The ability to insert an
> extra
> > attribute to a non-conforming element that says "this is extended
> beyond
> > the
> > schema".  Then you'd still catch mistakes in a standard type
> (e.g.
> > "runtal"
> > when "rental" was meant), but still allow true extensions (e.g.
> > "leasing").
> >
> > I like the idea of providing an enumeration, even in cases where
> that's
> > just
> > a serving suggestion or starting point.
> >
> >
> > Pete Cordell wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> One thing I often see are sets of enumerations that are not
> >> extensible....
> >>
> >>     <xs:simpleType name="foo">
> >>         <xs:restriction base="xs:string">
> >>             <xs:pattern value="[a-zA-Z0-0]{3,4}"/>
> >>             <xs:enumeration value="ABC"/>
> >>             <xs:enumeration value="DEFG"/>
> >>             <xs:anyEnumeration/>  <!-- New -->
> >>         </xs:restriction>
> >>     </xs:simpleType>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> >
>
http://www.nabble.com/Schema-1.1%3A-xs%3AanyEnumeration-considered--tf3415265.html#a10278076
> > Sent from the w3.org - xmlschema-dev mailing list archive at
> Nabble.com.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>


--
Chuck Herrick
mailto:cherrick@s...
512 289 0926 (cell)
830 839 4437 (home)

From petexmldev@t... Wed May 02 16:55:20 2007
Received: from aji.w3.org ([133.27.228.225])
	by frink.w3.or