C. M. Sperberg-McQueen-2 wrote:
> 
> 
> I may be being dense, but it's not clear to me what your requirement
> is.  Is it that
> 
> (A) You want the internal clinical systems to use a schema with
> 
>    <xs:element name="patients" type="patientsType" minOccurs="0"/>
> 
> while the archival system uses
> 
>    <xs:element name="patients" type="patientsType" minOccurs="1"/>
> 
> while tools and data flows for anonymized data should use
> 
>    <xs:element name="patients" type="patientsType" maxOccurs="0"/>
> 
> ?  In other words, you want to work with three related but different
> schemas?
> 
> 

It is A, and Michael and Steve's as well as some of your ideas are exactly
to the point. We would like to keep one master document that is the most
liberal and has only the minimal set as required items; and separate derived
ones; there are a few more variants than those mentioned here, most of them
"nested" to form a stack of requirements (the patient case is the only
non-nested).

The idea is that hospital administrators can put up a filter allowing only
anonymized files out. Or that researcher who want calibrations information
that is not relevant for others can check with their special version of the
schema if all required items are there. 

While Michael's $param idea looked easiest for me at first, I think Steve
has made a good point and that his way is preferred because is ensures that
the master document is always valid.

Being a signal processing and statistics guy with limited XML experience, I
now only have to figure out how to get the XPATH-copying he suggested right.
Michael's Book is on order but will need a few days at amazon.

Dieter












-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Conditional-Levels-of-a-Schema-tp22905179p22922665.html
Sent from the w3.org - xmlschema-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


From mike@s... Tue Apr 07 08:26:26 2009
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68])
	by