Re: abstract=true

[Lewis Denizen <sakai@ambisys.com>]

Hi,

Sorry for being buggy - just one last question...  The line that starts 
with:
	<xs:element ref="data" minOccurs="0"/>
which is embedded within "rpc-replyType" (roughly around line 70 when 
pretty-printed) doesn't reference to an element inside the Netconf 
schema.  Was this "data" element created to allow future expansion on 
RPC replies?  Or, is this just a small mistake in the XML schema? 
Thanks again :)

Lewis


Rob Enns wrote:
> No problems, I had to look it up myself to be sure! :-)
> FWIW I've been using XMLSpy under windows to double check
> correctness of the XSD.
>
> Rob
>
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 10:46:59AM +0900, Lewis Denizen wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Oops sorry, I guess I missed that in the previous drafts.  It does seem 
> > to be there...  I'm probably going to have to switch parsers/validators 
> > to see which work best.  Thanks for correcting me :)
> >
> > Lewis
> >
> > Rob Enns wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, 
> > >
> > > The abstract="true" attribute indicates that the type is
> > > an abstract type and can't be instantiated directly. It's
> > > a standard XSD attribute and it's been in the NETCONF XSD
> > > since the -00 draft. What are changes in the schema
> > > that you're concerned about? The only changes made in -03
> > > were to update the schema to match changes in the protocol
> > > itself (modulo bugs of course :-)). 
> > >
> > > One bug I've found in the -03 XSD is that the error-info
> > > element's type should be "xs:anyType" rather than "xs:any".
> > >
> > > Rob
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org 
> > > > [mailto:owner-netconf@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lewis Denizen
> > > > Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 12:30 AM
> > > > To: Netconf
> > > > Subject: abstract=true
> > > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Looking through the new Netconf XML Schema, I saw a lot of 
> > > > reference to 
> > > > the abstract="true" attribute for elements.  Is this a W3C approved 
> > > > attribute, or is it more of a "customized" attribute?  I 
> > > > didn't see W3C 
> > > > mentioning about an abstract attribute...  Also, a lot of 
> > > > standards-conforming libraries seem to have trouble understanding the 
> > > > "abstract" attribute.  Any reason why the model changed from Draft2? 
> > > > Thanks in advance!
> > > >
> > > > Lewis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
> > > > the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> > > > archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>
> > > --
> > > to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
> > > the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> > > archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>



--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>