On Feb 19, 2007, at 5:48 PM, Donal K. Fellows wrote:
Joseph Bester wrote:
I think there are some semantic differences between the various element definitions.
Yes. That's the point. Isn't it a good thing they're in different namespaces? :-)
Sort of, but it makes implementation of JSDL-consuming services more complicated.
Did the group consider having this as a separate extension child of the jsdl:Application element (independent of the POSIXApplication or HPCProfileApplication)?
No, because (IIRC) that's not (technically) type-compatible. This is because we specified that there can only be one xsd:any##other child of the JSDL Application element.
Donal.
Perhaps my version is an old one, but the schema I've seen has <xsd:any namespace="##other" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> in the definition of the Application_Type. joe