Hi Mike -- We will be creating XML schema to model our annotations and the attributes applicable to the representation of a particular element/type  will be grouped within the  complex type of the annotation schema.   My preference will be use annotation approach consistently in DFDL.  

Moreover the attributes defined in the compact form are not easily accessible from the XML Schema APIs, you have to look into the DOMNode associated with the  XSDElementDeclaration to get access to such attributes; it makes the programming task a little harder.  Having said that SOAP encoded schemas use this compact form to identify the type and dimensions of the array types; some folks like this approach and some hate it..  


Suman Kalia
IBM Toronto Lab
WebSphere Business Integration Application Connectivity Tools
Tel : 905-413-3923  T/L  969-3923
Fax : 905-413-4850
Internet ID : kalia@ca.ibm.com

----- Forwarded by Suman Kalia/Toronto/IBM on 03/02/2005 12:38 PM -----
Mike Beckerle <mike.beckerle@ascentialsoftware.com>
Sent by: owner-dfdl-wg@ggf.org

03/01/2005 03:53 PM

To
dfdl-wg@gridforum.org
cc
Subject
[dfdl-wg] alternate syntax for DFDL annotations





Up til now we've considered DFDL annotations only as inside the appinfo context. However, we should consider whether we should use non-native attributes as well or
as an alternative: E.g., simple DFDL rep properties could also be expressed like this:
    <xs:element name="foo"
                type="xs:string"
                dfdl:repType="text"
                dfdl:charset="UTF-8"
                dfdl:repLength="10"/>
 
This has the advantages of compactness, and is a fully supported way of extending XML Schema. That is, using non-native attributes is a supported extension idiom. This won't handle things that really need the syntactic support of element structure to express their complexity, e.g., things like specifying text delimiters with quoting and escape-sequence specifications. For those we'll still need to open an appinfo annotation up. However, for basic things like byteOrder and such it is far more attractive syntactically to use non-native attributes than appinfo annotations.

 
Comments?
 
...mikeb