As discussed on the WG call, it is clearer if the use of dfdl:defineXXXX is associated with a named re-usable annotation, and that a 'normal' unnamed DFDL annotation puts properties into use. With that in mind, when dfdl:format is used directly as an annotation on the xs:schema, it is putting properties into use. I therefore withdraw the proposal below. Regards Steve Hanson Programming Model Architect, WebSphere Message Brokers, OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair, Hursley, UK, Internet: smh@uk.ibm.com, Phone (+44)/(0) 1962-815848 ----- Forwarded by Steve Hanson/UK/IBM on 11/11/2009 17:48 ----- From: Steve Hanson/UK/IBM To: dfdl-wg@ogf.org Date: 11/11/2009 11:15 Subject: DFDL: Default dfdl:format annotation Alan and I were discussing this on Friday. We think that the 'default' dfdl:format would be better off contained within a dfdl:defineFormat annotation with no name, zero or one of which may exist in any given xsd. We think it makes things easier to document, specifically that dfdl:format now only appears in one place - as a child of dfdl:defineFormat, and that the term 'unnamed dfdl:defineFormat annotation' may be used to describe this annotation unambiguously. <dfdl:defineFormat> <dfdl:format ........ /> </dfdl:defineFormat> I'd like to add this to the first agenda item for today's call. Regards Steve Hanson Programming Model Architect, WebSphere Message Brokers, OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair, Hursley, UK, Internet: smh@uk.ibm.com, Phone (+44)/(0) 1962-815848 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 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