Re: Reason for sequence in XSD's
David, you are right about only web app j2ee xsd using choice, and some parts of j2ee application xsd. As Aaron, said there are number of users reporting error which turned out to be sequence error. Infact I myself have struggled some time because I tend to forgot that order has to be maintained. Using choice in place of sequence help you specially when you copy paste some elements. Jason, about "a case where it would be necessary to change the order of the elements", there is no such requirement or case where it is necessary but I consider sequence as an extra unrequired restrictions and people definatly don't like redundent thinks and specially "redundent restrictions" Thanks Rakesh On 1/15/07, Aaron Mulder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We have seen a number of errors on the user list that turned out to be plans with elements in the wrong order. I'd have preferred if there wasn't a specific order I think, but I don't feel strongly enough to want to change all the schemas. Thanks, Aaron On 1/14/07, Jason Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > >> Anyone got an idea, why it is so? I hope I am not missing something > > >> important here. > > > > >I think it was mostly my preference plus a vague attempt to imitate > > >the spec schemas. It's definitely not written in stone :-) Maybe we > > >should see what other people like. > > I think it is generally easier to pick up and learn and if there is a set > order to the elements. Also, I think it makes it easier to go from one > document to another if you know where to look in the document for the > specific element you might be looking for. Is there a specific reason to > not have a set order? I'm having trouble imagining a case where it would be > necessary to change the order of the elements. > >
Re: Reason for sequence in XSD's
We have seen a number of errors on the user list that turned out to be plans with elements in the wrong order. I'd have preferred if there wasn't a specific order I think, but I don't feel strongly enough to want to change all the schemas. Thanks, Aaron On 1/14/07, Jason Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > >> Anyone got an idea, why it is so? I hope I am not missing something > >> important here. > > >I think it was mostly my preference plus a vague attempt to imitate > >the spec schemas. It's definitely not written in stone :-) Maybe we > >should see what other people like. I think it is generally easier to pick up and learn and if there is a set order to the elements. Also, I think it makes it easier to go from one document to another if you know where to look in the document for the specific element you might be looking for. Is there a specific reason to not have a set order? I'm having trouble imagining a case where it would be necessary to change the order of the elements.
Re: Reason for sequence in XSD's
>> >> Anyone got an idea, why it is so? I hope I am not missing something >> important here. >I think it was mostly my preference plus a vague attempt to imitate >the spec schemas. It's definitely not written in stone :-) Maybe we >should see what other people like. I think it is generally easier to pick up and learn and if there is a set order to the elements. Also, I think it makes it easier to go from one document to another if you know where to look in the document for the specific element you might be looking for. Is there a specific reason to not have a set order? I'm having trouble imagining a case where it would be necessary to change the order of the elements.
Re: Reason for sequence in XSD's
On Jan 12, 2007, at 6:47 AM, Rakesh Midha wrote: Hello I was just wondering if there is any specific reason for using "sequence" elements in all our XSD schema's instead of "choice" elements. In most of the mapped J2EE schema's choice is used. Because we are using sequence the order of elements is fixed, and if child elements are not in order we get invalid element exception all the time. I could be wrong, but I thought I was usually copying the j2ee schemas usage. My impression was that only the web schema used choice. I didn't do a careful analysis :-) If choice is used instead of sequence, we can definatly avoid those exceptions. I liked sequence because you can tell if a particular kind of element is present by looking in only one place rather than having to look through the entire container element. Anyone got an idea, why it is so? I hope I am not missing something important here. I think it was mostly my preference plus a vague attempt to imitate the spec schemas. It's definitely not written in stone :-) Maybe we should see what other people like. thanks david jencks Thanks Rakesh
