Oracle Team, SCHEMA DEMOS NEEDED

Question

Hello Oracle Team,
I've been trying to use the schema parser for the last month. I've read multiple messages on this news group where people like me whine that they can't get anything to work. There are only like 3 examples that are downloaded with your parser. Obviously, with no other learning resources (besides blindly testing it to see how it reacts) more examples are needed.
Obviously there was some sort of Q.A. that the parser had to go through where it was tested before you posted it. Are those tests laying around somewhere on someone's hard drive. Could you please post some of those examples to this news group? A lot of people like me would really appreciate it.
You have responded to a couple of my previous questions by writing,
"The new beta was released today (October 26). It should fix the problem."
Well I tried to use the new beta for about 6 hours this morning and it didn't fix any of these same problems...
unique, key, keyref, extension, required(for attributes).
I know that the new parser has to work or you wouldn't keep responding to my messages saying it would. Please give some examples of how to use it.
Please post the java files, xsd files and xml files as examples of how to use these features. Please post examples that will run correctly through the parser. Also please post modified xml files that will crash the parser.
null

Answer 1

I've gone to the internet site... http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-0/
and went down the list of functionality that should be in a schema parser. Is this what oracle is basing their parser on? If not where is the standard oracle is going off of?
I've gone through this schema primer and I've tested the oracle schema parser. I've found that about 70% of it is not implemented or I just couldn't figure out how to get the parser to work. Also I've found there a couple of things that did work in the parser, just that the syntax was different. I've found these things (I realize that there are typos here but you'll get the basic idea).....
What Works, What doesn't work, comparing the oracle parser with the w3c spec.
DOESN'T WORK....
<annotation>
</annotation>
syntactical difference (<restriction>)
W3C's
<simpleType name="myInteger">
<restriction base="integer">
<minInclusive value="10000"/>
<maxInclusive value="99999"/>
</restriction>
</simpleType>
Oracle's
<simpleType name="myInteger" base="integer">
<minInclusive value="10000"/>
<maxInclusive value="99999"/>
</simpleType>
syntactical difference (<restriction>/<enumeration>)
W3C's
<simpleType name="USState">
<restriction base="string">
<enumeration value="AK"/>
<enumeration value="AL"/>
<enumeration value="AR"/>
<!-- and so on ... -->
</restriction>
</simpleType>
Oracle's
<simpleType name="USState" base="string">
<enumeration value="AK"/>
<enumeration value="AL"/>
<enumeration value="AR"/>
<!-- and so on ... -->
</simpleType>
<list> tag doesn't appear to type check at all, this code passes fine through the parser!(it shouldn't)
xml file>>
<Test>
asdf
</Test>
xsd file>>
<element name="Test"
type="this:listOfMyIntType" />
<simpleType name="listOfMyIntType">
<list itemType="positiveInteger"/>
</simpleType>
<union> tag doesn't appear to work
xml file>>
<Test>
-11
</Test>
xsd file>>
<element name="Test" type="r:TestUnion"/>
<simpleType name="TestUnion">
<union memberTypes="r:LowIntTyper:MedIntType"/>
</simpleType>
<simpleType name="LowIntType" base="positiveInteger">
<minInclusive value="10"/>
<maxInclusive value="20"/>
</simpleType>
<simpleType name="MedIntType" base="positiveInteger">
<minInclusive value="30"/>
<maxInclusive value="40"/>
</simpleType>
Does Work...:)
use="required" Partially Working...
required actually work now for attributes, you can even type check with it now!-BUT
ONLY AT THE TOP DEFINITIONS LEVEL. I think it's supposed to work inside nested definitions.
I found some really really weird activity with nested definitions though. If I define an
element having 2 attributes and the element is nested... if I say that both elements are
required, then if in the xml file I don't use either I will get the same buggy activity.
The parser doesn't care. BUT if I only declare 1 of the attributes and NOT the other then
the parser gets mad! So, the parser will only check nested level elements attributes if
there are more than one attributes declared and in the xml file I only specify one. HOW NICE!
xml file>>
This one DOESN'T catch the required
<LevelOne>
<elOne>stuff</elOne>
<elTwo>stuff</elTwo>
</LevelOne>
This one catches the required
<LevelOne bugFixOne="2asdf" testAtt="234">
<elOne>stuff</elOne> <elTwo>stuff</elTwo>
</LevelOne>
xsd>>
<complexType name="TypeOne">
<sequence>
<element name="elOne" type="string" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> <element name="elTwo" type="string" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </sequence>
&lt ;attribute name="testAtt" type="positiveInteger" use="required"/> <attribute name="bugFixOne" type="string"/> <attribute name="bugFixTwo" type="string"/> </complexType>
null