Re: Permit (greedy) conflicting wildcards

Pete Cordell writes:

> Replacing the xs:anys with xs:element declarations, UPAC wise I don't
> think the following would be legal:
> 
>     <xs:sequence>
>       <xs:element name="given" type="xs:string"/>
>       <xs:element name="any" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>       <xs:sequence minOccurs="0">
>           <xs:element name="middle" type="xs:string" />
>           <xs:element name="any" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>       </xs:sequence>
>       <xs:element name="family" type="xs:string"/>
>     </xs:sequence>

I'm feeling dense.  Can you show an example of instance having at least 
one element that would match more than one of the wildcards?   I think 
that's what you have to demonstrate to show that this violates UPA, given 
the new semantics for wildcard matching in Schema 1.1.   What am I 
missing?  I don't see why this violates UPC.

Noah

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------