Ah...right...I forgot about that aspect of restrictions. Thanks for the
clarification!

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Cezar Andrei <cezar.and...@oracle.com>wrote:

>  Chris,
>
>
>
> If you check the XMLSchema spec:
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#dateTime 3.2.7.1 explains the lexical
> representation of datetime. This '-'? yyyy '-' mm '-' dd 'T' hh ':' mm ':'
> ss ('.' s+)? (zzzzzz)? is the production that you can restrict in a
> derived restriction. If you don’t restrict using that production no instance
> will match it, so you’ll have a type with no valid values.
>
>
>
> As for XMLBeans serializing according to a pattern, it will as long as the
> instance is a valid instance of the defined type.
>
>
>
> Also check the definition of pattern:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#dt-pattern
>
>
>
> I hope this helps,
>
> Cezar
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Chris Hopkins [mailto:chrishopk...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 14, 2010 12:10 PM
>
> *To:* user@xmlbeans.apache.org
> *Subject:* XMLBeans enforcement of xs:pattern in simple type?
>
>
>
> Hi all –
>
>
>
> I’m working with a schema that has the following simple type:
>
>
>
>                 <xs:simpleType name="DateTimeGroupType">
>
>                                 <xs:annotation>
>
>                                                 <xs:documentation>A date
> time group always in Zulu time.</xs:documentation>
>
>                                 </xs:annotation>
>
>                                 <xs:restriction base="xs:dateTime">
>
>                   <xs:pattern
> value="^(3[0-1]|2[0-9]|1[0-9]|0[1-9])(0[0-9]|1[0-9]|2[0-3])([0-5][0-9])\sZ\s(Jan|Feb|Mar|Apr|May|Jun|Jul|Aug|Sep|Oct|Nov|Dec)\s[0-9]{2}$"/>
>
>                 </xs:restriction>
>
>                 </xs:simpleType>
>
>
>
> I thought, perhaps naively, that specifying a pattern would force the
> XMLBeans generated classes to validate against that pattern including
> producing a String representation conforming to that pattern when I call
> getStringValue(). This is not the result that I’m getting but perhaps I’m
> doing something wrong with the definition.
>
>
>
> Does anyone have any insight or experience doing the same thing?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>

Reply via email to