Well, I'm no expert on XSD since I never cared about learning it... but if I
go back to your example, why didn't you use xsi:type in some places, for
example:
<description>
<original_author>
<item> ...
Is you used it here it would be:
<description xsi:type="RESOURCE_DESCRIPTION">
<original_author xsi:type="hashTableStringString">
<item xsi:type="dictionaryItem"> ...
Regards,
Mattias
2006/11/17, Andrew Patterson <andrewpatto at gmail.com>:
>
> Mattias,
>
> the usage of xsi:type is solely because object hierarchies are being
> used in the AOM. Using xsi:type allows serializers to know the type
> they are getting before having to parse it in.. however, even without
> xsi:type, your serialization would still not be correct for the xsd
> given (i.e. let us pretend there is only a C_ATTRIBUTE, with no
> subclasses). Any reference to an element of type C_ATTRIBUTE
> in xml should result in an xml entry named by the 'element with
> type C_ATTRIBUTE' i.e. 'children'. You never put type names into
> the actual xml instances, merely element names. And for sequences,
> this means repeating the xml entry name 'children' (augmented in
> this case by an xsi:type to help with the subclasses).
>
> Andrew
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at openehr.org
> http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20061117/72e6d5ec/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical at openehr.org
http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
