Best regards,
Stoil
On 3/24/06,
Keith Visco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Stoil,
It's been a long time since I last read the Schema specification, so I
can't say with any certainty, but if I remember correctly I believe
there are validation constraints against cyclic definitions. You may
want to re-read the validation sections of schema spec to double check that.
And it may certainly be that Castor's Schema object model incorrectly
allows such a definition. Again, it's been a while since I last looked
at some of that stuff.
Sorry I couldn't be of much help.
--Keith
stoil valchkov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is not really castor concerned - sorry about that. I have a case
> with cyclic dependencies in complex types definitions. Castor works fine
> - returns correct type, but this enters my code in endless loop and I
> needed a lot of time to catch the problem.
> However - is this schema legal? Is it allowed to have cyclic
> dependencies in types?
> In fact if minOccurs = 0 this is not really a problem for xml defined by
> schema. But there are cases in which schema defines impossible xml.
>
> 10x in advance,
> Stoil
-------------------------------------------------
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please
send an empty message to the following address:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------
