> I agree, that it's not OO style, but why isn't it implementable in XML? XML > isn't OO, it's just a way of storing structured information, and the guys > building the XML parsers to create the AOM objects again can probably deal > with that.
The use of complexType with extensions in XSD follows the OO model. So if it has a field called 'children' in C_ATTRIBUTE, that field is going to be in all in extensions - called 'children'.. if those sub classes also define a similar field, then they will have two fields. I just presumed that the AOM had a textual mistake (whilst the 'alternatives' and 'members' are more correct descriptions of the attribute, they technically are still 'children' so I don't see a problem with them having that inherited field and using it to store alternatives and members respectively). Andrew _______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
