Pete Robbins wrote:
The annotations are there to cope with the cases where, according to
the SDO
spec, we would create properties or types with "."s in. For example
<element name="interface.cpp" type="sca:CPPInterface"
substitutionGroup="sca:interface"
sdo:name="interfaceCpp"/>
Without sdo:name= we would generate a property called "interface.cpp". I
believe this causes problem when using XPath expressions.
cheers,
On 07/08/06, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I noticed some SDO annotations in the SCDL XSDs used by the C++ runtime.
I'm working on the new SCDL XSDs representing the recursive composition
model from the SCA 0.95 spec and wondering if we really need to add
annotations to the XSDs again. Given that we are not generating code
from these XSDs do we really need these SDO annotations?
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ok, I guess we're not going to use XPath on SCDL right away :) so I'm
not going to worry about the annotations now then. I'm still curious
though, it is valid in XSD to have a dot in an element name, and I would
expect XPath to be able to deal with that... Isn't there a way to escape
these dots in an XPath expression?
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
