No "names" in Anonymous Simple Types

[R. Allen Wyke <emergency-tc@earthlink.net>]

[Renamed Subject]

This was actually result of Issue #16 during the Public Comment period. 
I know Gary had an issue with their parser not liking anonymous types, 
and links to the XML Schema Recommendation were circulated or referred 
to review at one point. Anyway, you can read about the issue and 
resolution in the "CAP Issues List.xls" posted under the Documents 
section of the TC website.

Looks like we should reopen this issue and include on our new list for 
discussion - Allen

On Mar 27, 2004, at 7:57 PM, Bob Wyman wrote:

> R. Allen Wyke wrote:
>>> On Mar 26, 2004, at 5:33 PM, Kon Wilms wrote:
>>> We had to do some modifications to get it to work on
>>> strongly-typed parsers,
>> Stop the press (just for a sec). Would love to hear what
>> modifications you had to do. Good feedback to the group
>> for the next version.
> 	He may have had to make the same kind of bug fixes that we did
> in order to get the XSD to work with his tools. For instance,
> anonymous simple types in XSDs should not have "name" attributes.
> Thus, we had to modify the XSD to remove these attributes from the
> many places they occur in the CAP XSD.
>
> 	For example, the CAP spec calls for:
>              <element name="msgType">
>                     <simpleType name = "msgType">
>                         <restriction base="string">
>                          ....
>                         </restriction>
>                     </simpleType>
>                 </element>
>
> 	We had to remove the "name" attribute to make it conform to
> standards. Thus, we have:
>              <element name="msgType">
>                     <simpleType>
>                         <restriction base="string">
>                          ....
>                         </restriction>
>                     </simpleType>
>                 </element>
>
> 	Note: It is normally the case that these sorts of edits to the
> schemas are done *before* something is put up for adoption. Certainly,
> the schema should be put through a validator of some kind before being
> published.. In this particular case, most "advanced" XSD tools will
> either complain about the name attributes or will, like Microsoft's
> tools, simply rewrite the schema once it is loaded into the
> development environment.
> 	Was the CAP schema ever validated? If so, what tool was used
> to do the validation?
>
> 		bob wyman
>
>
--
R. Allen Wyke
Chief Technology Officer
awyke@blue292.com
919.806.2440