[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ciq] CIQ using UBL NDR?
Max is right that the MSXML parser will understand the tag. I'm not educated enough yet on the matter to make a call on the UBL NDR issue specifically, but I agree 'xs:any' should be eliminated. My 2¢, and I never thought about it before this string started, but including 'xs:any' will require a lot of design time effort for anyone wanting to utilize our efforts. Best to eliminate if at all possible. Rgds, Mark -----Original Message----- From: Max Voskob [mailto:max.voskob@paradise.net.nz] Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 11:24 PM To: ciq@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [ciq] CIQ using UBL NDR? Hido, Parsers from MS Windows part of the world handle it alright. I have never had any problems. What parsers exactly are you talking about? Cheers, Max -----Original Message----- From: Hido Hasimbegovic [mailto:hido.hasimbegovic@customware.net] Sent: Tuesday, 19 October 2004 15:53 To: ciq@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [ciq] CIQ using UBL NDR? Hi Max I think both "xs:anyAttribute" and "xsd:any" should go. Implementation time, they cause no end to problems. Parsers will fail the schema unless instructed to ignore "violation of the unique particle attribute rule".
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]