Subject: Potential problem in Netconf protocol XSD?

From: "Sharon Chisholm" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 18:48:02 -0500

Hi

Can other people validate instances of rpc-reply? As I indicated in the
Notification thread, since I've updated to the latest XSD for the base
Notification protocol, I'm having trouble validating my instances. I'm
having the same problem with basic rpc-replies. I'm hoping it is just
me, but I do have a colleague experiencing the same problem.

I am not able to validate the examples in the protocol specification
(-12). I get an error whenever the content of the <data></data> tags are
anything other then a null-length string. It complains that it is
suppose to be empty.

Here is the change:

New:

     <xs:complexType name="dataInlineType"> 
       <xs:complexContent> 
         <xs:restriction base="xs:anyType"/> 
      </xs:complexContent> 
    </xs:complexType> 

Old:

     <xs:complexType name="dataInlineType">
       <xs:complexContent>
         <xs:extension base="xs:anyType"/>
       </xs:complexContent>
     </xs:complexType>

Are other people able to validate?

Sharon Chisholm
Nortel 
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada

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

---

From: Martin Bjorklund <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 09:14:06 +0100 (CET)

>          <xs:extension base="xs:anyType"/>

In the -12 draft, dataInlineType is defined as

This was discussed in this thread (and also others):
http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/netconf.2006/msg00846.html 

The suggested change is to use the xs:extension instead.  Are you
saying that xs:extension doesn't work for you?

/martin

---

From: "Rob Enns" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 16:39:53 -0800

> saying that xs:extension doesn't work for you?

This is definitely a problem, the XSD should use xs:extension rather
than xs:restriction. This was a proposed change for the RFC editor to
make, we need to be sure it's done before the RFC is issued.

Rob