Is this related to DB (e.g. SQL) data binding?  I'm not sure it has a big 
influence on OOP (JAVA/C++) data binding.

Pete Cordell
Codalogic
For XML C++ data binding visit http://www.codalogic.com/lmx/

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Kay"
To: "'Pete Cordell'"


> I think the rule was always there because schema was intended for more 
> than
> validation, e.g. for data binding applications, where assignment of types 
> is
> important.
>
> Michael Kay
> http://www.saxonica.com/
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> I was just wondering why schema has the rules about "Schema Component
>> Constraint: Element Declarations Consistent".  i.e. if two
>> elements in the same complex type have the same name, then
>> they have to have the same type.
>> Surely if the association of element information items to
>> particles is unambiguous and someone wants to declare:
>>
>> <xs:sequence>
>> <xs:element name='a' type='xs:int'/>
>> <xs:element name='a' type='xs:string'/>
>> </xs:sequence>
>>
>> then how does it break XML or schema to allow them to do it?
>> I can see that this might be a problem for XSLT processing,
>> and as such such a schema design could be deemed practice,
>> but is that schemas problem?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Pete Cordell
>> Codalogic
>> For XML C++ data binding visit http://www.codalogic.com/lmx/



From ht@i... Thu Jun 26 18:02:10 2008
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68