Making Required Fields Mutable

, ,
1

Imported from previous forum

2

[ original email was from Jim Northey - jnorthey@lasalletech.com ]
We agreed in the 8/27 meeting to make required fields mutable. With this in mind I propose we go to two elements groups and two attribute groups per message, block, repeating group, and block repeating component:

name_componentType_elements_base
name_componentType_elements_custom

name_componentType_attributes_base
name_componentType_attributes_custom

This way we can keep order - the definition if an element or attribute is required is part of its declaration.

Any thoughts or comments?

3

[ original email was from Jim Northey - jnorthey@lasalletech.com ]
Actually would prefer to implement as:

name_componentType_elementsRequired
name_ComponentType_elementsOptional
name_ComponentType_elementsCustom

and

name_attributesRequired
name_attributesOptional
name_attributesCustom

This way we can restrict the required group at a later time should we deem this appropriate without causing major rework for schema users.

> We agreed in the 8/27 meeting to make required fields mutable. With this in mind I propose we go to two elements groups and two attribute groups per message, block, repeating group, and block repeating component:
>
>
> name_componentType_elements_base
> name_componentType_elements_custom
>
> name_componentType_attributes_base
> name_componentType_attributes_custom
>
> This way we can keep order - the definition if an element or attribute is required is part of its declaration.
>
> Any thoughts or comments?
>