On Oct 10, 2005, at 9:58 AM, Dmitry Stogov wrote:
Hi George,
I looked careful into schema definition and validation.
Seems you are wrong, test 49 works as expected and your new test 81
defines
invalid schema.
Test 81 defines perfectly valid schema. gsoap generates it and
dotNet parses it correctly as I wrote the test out.
Test 49 looks wrong to me. The definition of restriction is that you
use base as the base, and define restrictions (not extensions) to the
schema off that. If you look at the definition of restriction and
all the examples in the XML Schema spec (specifically the links I
forwarded in the last mail), they support this interpretation and not
the extension interpretation that 49 implements. Where did the
scenario for test 49 come from?
Look into validate tests.
I am not XMLSchema expert and I am not 100% sure, but seems I am
right.
We need decide it ASAP (we like to relese 5.1 soon).
I agree. I have some broken gsoap and .Net based services that need
the behavior in test 81 and I really don't want to have to maintain a
patched SOAP library in all my products :). I'm also not a XMLSchema
expert, but test 49 doesn't look like any example restriction code
I've seen.
I've added soap@lists and Christian to the cc: here, so that
hopefully someone more knowledgeable than either of us can chime in.
Since the attachments weren't contained in your reply, I'm
reattaching my 49 and 81 for those others.
Thanks,
George
--
PHP Soap Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
