XSD keyref or number literal - xsd

Is it possible to define a type which can be either a keyref or a number literal? Just like in any typed programming language you can assign either a number literal OR the name of another variable to a numeric variable. I'm making a schema to define drawing api elements (for another programming language) and would like to define a color type that can either be a hexadecimal literal (such as 0xFF0000 for bright red) OR be a reference to a color defined elsewhere. So you could do (in a XML document):
<color key="dialogBorder1">0x222222</color>
<color key="dialogFill1">0xCCCCCC</color>
<!-- later... -->
<windowTheme name="warningWindow">
<border>
<color>0xFF0000</color> <!-- defined literally -->
</border>
<fill>
<solid>
<color>dialogFill1</color> <!-- defined by keyref -->
</solid>
</fill>
</windowTheme>
If it were possible to impose a choice restriction on attributes I could do something like the following, but I am under the impression this is not possible with current (1.0) version of XSD spec.
<!-- I wish: -->
<xs:complexType name="colorType" >
<xs:attrchoice>
<xs:attribute name="value" type="HexLiteral" /> <!-- literal -->
<xs:attribute name="ref" type="xs:string" /> <!-- keyref (defined elsewhere) -->
</xs:attrchoice>
</xs:complexType>
Which would allow either lieral value or keyref ref:
<color value="0xFF0000" /> <!-- OK -->
<color ref="dialogBorder1" /> <!-- OK -->
But not both:
<color value="0xFF0000" ref="colorXYZ" /> <!-- NOT OK -->

The post is somewhat inconsistent in what's describing. The first XML shows color used without attributes, then the xsd for colorType goes off with some attributes. I assume the XML is what you wanted.
So the following works for:
To define a color type that can either be a hexadecimal literal (such as 0xFF0000 for bright red) OR be a reference to a color defined elsewhere
<xsd:simpleType name="ColorHex">
<xsd:union memberTypes="xsd:string">
<xsd:simpleType>
<xsd:restriction base="xsd:string">
<xsd:pattern value="0x[0-9a-fA-F]{6}"/>
</xsd:restriction>
</xsd:simpleType>
</xsd:union>
</xsd:simpleType>
The above uses the same pattern as the Color type in XHTML (I am showing this to give you sources of inspiration):
<!-- sixteen color names or RGB color expression-->
<xsd:simpleType name="Color">
<xsd:union memberTypes="xsd:NMTOKEN">
<xsd:simpleType>
<xsd:restriction base="xsd:token">
<xsd:pattern value="#[0-9a-fA-F]{3}([0-9a-fA-F]{3})?"/>
</xsd:restriction>
</xsd:simpleType>
</xsd:union>
</xsd:simpleType>
The idea here is to use a union. The downside may be that since all that's not matching the HEX pattern will be matched by the string, invalid HEX syntax (e.g. missing digits) will pass through as references.
Other downsides may be in how well is xsd:union supported by the programming languages that you're targeting.

Related

What does this XSD restriction mean. Derived type with restriction just an attribute of the base type

There is a base type "Objectnummering-e" and a derived type "ObjectNummering-geoBAG".
The restriction on "ObjectNummering-geoBAG" mentions an attribute of the base type.
It is unclear to me what this does. To me the two types are identical. But are they?
<complexType name="ObjectNummering-geoBAG">
<simpleContent>
<restriction base="BG:ObjectNummering-e">
<attribute ref="StUF:noValue"/>
</restriction>
</simpleContent>
</complexType>
<complexType name="ObjectNummering-e">
<simpleContent>
<extension base="BG:ObjectNummering">
<attributeGroup ref="StUF:element"/>
</extension>
</simpleContent>
</complexType>
<simpleType name="ObjectNummering">
<restriction base="string">
<length value="16"/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
<attributeGroup name="element">
<attribute ref="StUF:noValue"/>
<attribute ref="StUF:exact"/>
</attributeGroup>
As always, the only reliable way to answer a question like this is to go to the W3C specification. Your complex type is a 'complex type with simple content' so the relevant section is:
https://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#declare-type, sub-section Complex Type Definition with simple content Schema Component
3 if the type definition ·resolved· to by the ·actual value· of the base [attribute] is a complex type definition, the {attribute uses} of that type definition, unless the alternative is chosen, in which case some members of that type definition's {attribute uses} may not be included, namely those whose {attribute declaration}'s {name} and {target namespace} are the same as one of the following:
3.1 the {name} and {target namespace} of the {attribute declaration} of an attribute use in the set per clause 1 or clause 2 above;
3.2 what would have been the {name} and {target namespace} of the {attribute declaration} of an attribute use in the set per clause 1 above but for the ·actual value· of the use [attribute] of the relevant among the [children] of being prohibited.
In plain English, it means that a complex type restriction must re-declare any attributes that it wants to retain - they are not automatically inherited. So derived type "ObjectNummering-geoBAG" only has 1 attribute, not 2.

Generating XSD from RelaxNG while keeping root-element restriction

I want to convert the following schema from RNC/RNG to W3C XSD.
default namespace = ""
namespace a = "http://relaxng.org/ns/compatibility/annotations/1.0"
namespace rng = "http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"
start = starting_risk
starting_risk =
element risk {
element continents { Continents }?
}
Continents = element continent { Continent }+
Continent =
element country { Country }*,
element sea { Sea }*
Country = xsd:string { minLength = "1" maxLength = "100" }
Sea = xsd:string { minLength = "1" maxLength = "100" }
Using trang, I end up with
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" elementFormDefault="qualified">
<xs:element name="risk">
<xs:complexType>
<xs:sequence>
<xs:element minOccurs="0" ref="continents"/>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
</xs:element>
<xs:element name="continents" type="Continents"/>
<xs:complexType name="Continents">
<xs:sequence>
<xs:element maxOccurs="unbounded" ref="continent"/>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:element name="continent" type="Continent"/>
<xs:complexType name="Continent">
<xs:sequence>
<xs:element minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded" ref="country"/>
<xs:element minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded" ref="sea"/>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:element name="country" type="Country"/>
<xs:element name="sea" type="Sea"/>
<xs:simpleType name="Country">
<xs:restriction base="xs:string">
<xs:minLength value="1"/>
<xs:maxLength value="100"/>
</xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="Sea">
<xs:restriction base="xs:string">
<xs:minLength value="1"/>
<xs:maxLength value="100"/>
</xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>
</xs:schema>
The problem is that the hierarchy is lost. The 'risk' element is the root of the schema and the only valid element at that level. In the RNC, the relationship between 'risk' and 'continent' elements is parent to child. But in the XSD, they are siblings. What am I doing wrong/ have I not understood?
You’re not doing anything wrong. I think unfortunately you just can’t use trang to generate an XSD from your RNC schema that preserves the restriction on what’s allowed as the root element.
You could instead manually create an XSD restricted to having risk be the only global element, with all the rest of the elements each being a local element. But (as far as I know) you can’t generate such an XSD using trang. The reason is that (again, as far as I know at least) trang basically always generates XSDs only with global elements.
You might think you could generate an XSD with local elements if you wrote your RNC like this:
start =
element risk {
element continents {
element continent {
element country { xsd:string { minLength = "1" maxLength = "100" } }*,
element sea { xsd:string { minLength = "1" maxLength = "100" } }*
}+
}?
}
That’s basically structured in the same way you’d want to structure your XSD if you did it manually.
But if you run that through trang to generate an XSD, you’ll find that every single element comes out as a global element in the resulting XSD. That’s just how trang always does it.
So unless there’s some magic way I’m unaware of to force trang to do otherwise, your only alternative if you want to restrict your XSD schema to only having risk allowed as the root element is, create the XSD manually.
I guess that could be seen as a design flaw in trang, but arguably the real problem is that XML Schema by design has nothing similar to RelaxNG’s start to explicitly specify a root element.
If XML Schema did have a similar simple way like RelaxNG’s start to specify what’s allowed as the root element, then trang could just output that in the XSD and you’d have what you want.
But because XSD has nothing like start, your only mechanism for restricting your schema to having only one particular root element is to completely (re)structure your XSD into the “local style”.
However, as mentioned earlier in this answer, you unfortunately can’t generate such a “local style” XSD from RelaxNG sources using trang. You instead must separately create the XSD manually.
It’s imaginable trang ideally could have been designed with some option to allow you to generate “local style” XSDs or maybe with some heuristics to somehow infer when that’s the output style it should use. But the reality is, that’s not the way trang actually works, and it’s not going to change.
So while I’m sure that isn’t the answer you were hoping to get, I hope it helps clarify things.

XSD Schema - unable to add annotation in simple type

I have a problem with schema and annotation for simpleType.
My schema:
<xsd:schema xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
/...CODE.../
<xsd:simpleType name="DateTimeType">
<xsd:restriction base="xsd:dateTime"/>
<xsd:annotation> <!--Line: 161 -->
<xsd:documentation>
Date time
</xsd:documentation>
</xsd:annotation>
</xsd:simpleType>
</xsd:schema>
My error
lineNumber: 161; columnNumber: 25; s4s-elt-must-match.1: The content
of 'simpleType' must match (annotation?, (restriction | list | union)).
A problem was found starting at: annotation.
How can I fix it ?
Regards
Ok, I fixed it. What is important: the order of elements in exaple simple type. So, good order is annotation, and then e.q. restriction or union.
<xsd:simpleType name="DateTimeType">
<xsd:annotation>
<xsd:documentation>
Date time
</xsd:documentation>
</xsd:annotation>
<xsd:restriction base="xsd:dateTime"/>
</xsd:simpleType>

How to define a 'literal' in XSD

I'm a newbie with XSD and pretty much at wits end.
What I need to do is somehow define a 'literal' element within an XSD file so that users can use it in an XML document.
For example:
In the XML document, I want to let a user be able to add an element like this:
<WordBoundary/>
but let the XSD file define not only the name 'WordBoundary' but also a list of Elements within which are of types defined elsewhere within the XSD.
Is this possible?
Updated to provide more information:
I am trying to write an XSD (or set of XSDs) which provide a library of pre-defined elements for an end-user to use.
The elements will ultimately be used to generate a Regular Expression but I want to hide the complexities of regular expressions from users as far as possible.
The XSD will use .NETs XSD.Exe to generate C# classes.
Currently I have defined elements like and and etc. which work fine but rely on their ultimate regex pattern being defined in code. Some of the elements have a Pattern attribute to allow fine tuning but this clutters up the XML document for users somewhat.
Examples of the built-up existing C# definitions:
const string BidMatch = #"(?<" + BidGroupName + ">" + DecimalNumberFragment + ")";
const string OfferMatch = #"(?<" + OfferGroupName + ">" + DecimalNumberFragment + ")";
const string BidOfferSpreadMatch = BidMatch + OptionalGap + RangeSeparatorFragment + OptionalGap + OfferMatch;
I therefore wanted to be able to refactor this so that all the regex patterns are moved from code into XSD definitions to form a library (or if it turns out not to be possible an XML file looked up by name) whereby there are primitives such as and and commonly-used but more complex structures such as etc.
So the use can use predefined elements like directly within their XML document but also be able to build up their own like this:
<Group captureName="MyCustomMatch">
<WordBoundary/>
<Digit/>
<Literal pattern="[xyz]" />
<AnyOf/>
<AnyOfChoice>
<DecimalNumber />
<Gap />
<DecimalNumber />
</AnyOfChoice>
<AnyOfChoice>
<LiteralText text="(" />
<DecimalNumber />
<LiteralText text=")" />
</AnyOfChoice>
<WordBoundary/>
</Group>
(In fact the prefined elements in the library would be build up the same way)
From the code point of view, I currently have AnyOf/Group etc. working by looking at the element type and calling a method to generate the pattern. For this to work, all these new Elements need to have a common ancestor, e.g. RegexLiteral, from which I can just read the Pattern attribute or whatever and add it into the full pattern.
I have tried extending a common type and trying to override its Pattern attribute to use a fixed attribute but XSD does not apparently allow this.
I am hoping this is just a limitation of my XSD knowledge rather than of XSD itself and hoping you clever guys know a way of achieving this.
Update2:
Thought I had it with this XSD fragment
<xs:complexType name="LiteralFragment" abstract="true">
<xs:attribute name="Pattern" type="xs:string" />
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="Fred">
<xs:complexContent >
<xs:extension base="LiteralFragment" >
<xs:attribute name="Pattern" type="xs:string" fixed="BBB" />
</xs:extension>
</xs:complexContent>
</xs:complexType>
but XSD (and Xsd2Code for that matter) generate this rubbish code:
public partial class Fred : LiteralFragment
{
private string pattern1Field;
public Fred()
{
this.pattern1Field = "BBB";
}
[System.Xml.Serialization.XmlAttributeAttribute("Pattern")]
public string Pattern1
{
get { return this.pattern1Field; }
set { this.pattern1Field = value; }
}
}
which bombs because there are two XmlAttributeAttribute with "Pattern" being used.
What I need is an XSD generator that is intelligent enough to realise this and generate this code instead:
public partial class Fred : LiteralFragment
{
public Fred()
{
Pattern = "BBB";
}
}
Try this....
The XSD:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!--XML Schema generated by QTAssistant/XSD Module (http://www.paschidev.com)-->
<xsd:schema attributeFormDefault="unqualified" elementFormDefault="qualified" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
<xsd:element name="root" type="TRoot"/>
<xsd:element name="WordBoundary">
<xsd:complexType/>
</xsd:element>
<xsd:element name="SomethingElse">
<xsd:complexType mixed="true">
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:any minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded" processContents="lax"/>
</xsd:sequence>
</xsd:complexType>
</xsd:element>
<xsd:complexType name="TRoot">
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:any minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded" processContents="lax"/>
</xsd:sequence>
</xsd:complexType>
</xsd:schema>
And this XML:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<!-- Sample XML generated by QTAssistant (http://www.paschidev.com) -->
<root xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<SomethingElse>Text <WordBoundary/> another <WordBoundary/>...</SomethingElse>
</root>
Is this what you had in mind?

xsd validation ERROR with both minOccurs and length used simultaneously

<xsd:element name="CurrencyCode" minOccurs="0" type="xsd:string">
<xsd:simpleType>
<xsd:restriction>
<xsd:length value="3"/>
</xsd:restriction>
</xsd:simpleType>
</xsd:element>
I want my Currencycode to be an optional value and if at all there is a value it should have a length of 3 letters .. either my CurrencyCode can have Length=0 or length=3
When i use the above code the validator returns an error when there is an empty field
So how can i deal with this ??
Have not tried this (do not have suitable env set up on this machine) but according to the specification you can do as follows:
<xsd:element name="CurrencyCode" minOccurs="0" type="xsd:string">
<xsd:simpleType>
<xsd:restriction base="xsd:string">
<xsd:pattern value="(?:^$|\w{3})"/>
</xsd:restriction>
</xsd:simpleType>
</xsd:element>
Regular expression (?:^$|\w{3}) matches either empty string or exactly three word characters. You can use (?:^$|[A-Z]{3}) in case you want to accept currency codes only in upper case.

Resources