Sorry Suman I don't understand what you are saying. The following are identical.

<xs:schema dfdl:ref="block" dfdl:encoding="ASCII" ...>
</xs:schema>

<xs:schema ...>
<xs:annotation>
<xs:appinfo="www.ogf.or/dfdl/1.0">
<dfdl:format ref="block" dfdl:encoding="ASCII" />
</xs:appinfo>
</xs:annotation>
</xs:schema>

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL)
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh@uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848

From: Suman Kalia <kalia@ca.ibm.com>
To: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM@IBMGB
Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>
Date: 05/12/2011 12:28
Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] short form on xs:schema?

On another note, I am also looking at the real usefulness of providing this annotation in the short form on xs:schema as most of the time users would need a default format at the schema level referring either to DFDLFormat ( General purpose DFDL format definition) and/or containing defaults for other attributes.

We may want to provide for completeness but the same argument would hold for other dfdl attributes..

Suman Kalia
IBM Canada Lab
WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead
Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923
Email: kalia@ca.ibm.com

For info on Message broker
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.html

From: Steve Hanson <smh@uk.ibm.com>
To: Suman Kalia/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>
Date: 12/05/2011 04:49 AM
Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] short form on xs:schema?

Suman

That is exactly what Mike is suggesting. If you look at Table 7 in the spec (section 7.1) and the wording about short form in section 7.1.3.3 then the natural assumption is that DFDL attributes on xs:schema would be allowed as the short form of the anonymous dfdl:format annotation's properties. If a property occurs in both short form and attribute/element form that is a schema definition error as per section 7.1.3.

So, are there any reasons why this should not be allowed? I can recall this being discussed in the past but I don't remember a conclusion. The only reason I can think of is that it would easy for a human reader to miss DFDL properties on xs:schema because of all the namespace attributes that typically occur there. But that's just a formatting/style thing.

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL)
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh@uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848

From: Suman Kalia <kalia@ca.ibm.com>
To: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>
Cc: dfdl-wg@ogf.org, dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org
Date: 05/12/2011 00:55
Subject: Re: [DFDL-WG] short form on xs:schema?
Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org

One way to view this annotation would be as if it is defined on the default format at the xs:schema.. Question would be what if dfdl:format at xs:schema also has dfdl:encoding specified - which one would win ?..

Suman Kalia
IBM Canada Lab
WMB Toolkit Architect and Development Lead
Tel: 905-413-3923 T/L 313-3923
Email: kalia@ca.ibm.com

For info on Message broker
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/websphere/zones/businessintegration/wmb.html

From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>
To: dfdl-wg@ogf.org
Date: 12/02/2011 05:46 PM
Subject: [DFDL-WG] short form on xs:schema?
Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org

I don't know that we ever talked about this.

Most schema constructs support short form

<xs:element ... dfdl:encoding="utf-8" />

Does the xs:schema itself support short form for the "default" format properties?

<xs:schema xmlns:xs="...."
dfdl:encoding="utf-8">
...
</xs:schema>

--
Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair
Tel: 781-330-0412-- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org
http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg -- dfdl-wg mailing list dfdl-wg@ogf.org
http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU