On 11/27/2012 10:42 PM, Seref Arikan wrote: > I'll attempt to comment on Bert's problem, hoping I understand it :) > When you do not have a root element definition in an XSD, you can't > create XML documents which will be valid according to that XSD. What > Bert is saying is, if we had a bunch of root elements in the XSDs, it > would allow us create valid XML with these root elements. At the > moment, if you create an XML element with a DVQuantity subclass as the > root, it would not be valid according to XSD, because the XSD does not > explicitly list DvQuantity as a root element > > As it is, the XSDs define larger units of documents, and having finer > granularity requires having more root elements defined as options in > the XSDs. > > Bert, did I get it?
Seref, I had originally 3 questions/remarks: - having the root elements - why not remove that "items" line - where is the demographic.xsd I also had 4th question, but I dropped that, that was my mistake. ------------- I just want root-elements for every concrete class which can be root in a XML-instantiation. This is not for DvQuantity, because that class will never be root in an OpenEHR XML instance-document. It is maybe 10 lines added, and none changed or removed. If Heath wants to keep that "items" line, it is not in my way. And the lines I want added will be in no ones way. It is a recommendation to add these. I can list the quotes of well known XML-specialists which recommend this. But I don't want to spend any more time on this issue, because: - it can easily become offending - it doesn't matter to me, I write my own XSD (better, I have them ready). - I don't mind if the OpenEHR website proceeds in this way, it is not my problem. best regards Bert Verhees
