I've created a key
/keyref
on the root element in order to create document-wide uniqueness based on the specified element.
Therefore, via .//foo/@name
every occurrence of @name
across all instances of foo
must be unique; likewise for .//bar/@name
. This seems to be working fine. These are referenced by .//foo-ref/@name-ref
and .//bar-ref/@name-ref
respectively, also defined at the root node.
However, I've gathered that one cannot create an optional key, and this is presenting a bit of a problem. Semantically, by the nature of the conforming documents, a key is not required on every single instance of foo
or bar
. The instances of foo-ref/@name-ref
would obviously need to target an existing foo/@name
, but it isn't semantically invalid for a foo
to be without a @name
.
Is there any work-around for this? I don't like the idea of consumers having to define a key for every single element, when reasonably only a handful will need them.
Here's the example schema (of course, I'm not deploying some foobar
schema, but the structure is identical; this is just a testing schema I've been toying with)
<xs:schema elementFormDefault="qualified" xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
<xs:complexType name="ref">
<xs:attribute name="name-ref" type="xs:string" use="required" />
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="obj">
<xs:attribute name="name" type="xs:string" use="optional" />
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="foo">
<xs:complexContent>
<xs:extension base="obj">
<xs:sequence>
<xs:choice maxOccurs="unbounded">
<xs:element name="foo" type="foo" />
<xs:element name="bar" type="bar" />
<xs:element name="foo-ref" type="foo-ref" />
<xs:element name="bar-ref" type="bar-ref" />
</xs:choice>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:extension>
</xs:complexContent>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="foo-ref">
<xs:complexContent>
<xs:extension base="ref" />
</xs:complexContent>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="bar">
<xs:complexContent>
<xs:extension base="obj">
<xs:sequence>
<xs:choice maxOccurs="unbounded">
<xs:element name="bar" type="bar" />
<xs:element name="qux" type="qux" />
<xs:element name="bar-ref" type="bar-ref" />
</xs:choice>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:extension>
</xs:complexContent>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="bar-ref">
<xs:complexContent>
<xs:extension base="ref" />
</xs:complexContent>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="qux">
<xs:simpleContent>
<xs:extension base="xs:string" />
</xs:simpleContent>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:element name="root">
<xs:complexType>
<xs:sequence>
<xs:element name="foo" type="foo" maxOccurs="unbounded" />
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:key name="foo">
<xs:selector xpath=".//foo" />
<xs:field xpath="@name" />
</xs:key>
<xs:key name="bar">
<xs:selector xpath=".//bar" />
<xs:field xpath="@name" />
</xs:key>
<xs:keyref name="foo-ref" refer="foo">
<xs:selector xpath=".//foo-ref" />
<xs:field xpath="@name-ref" />
</xs:keyref>
<xs:keyref name="bar-ref" refer="bar">
<xs:selector xpath=".//bar-ref" />
<xs:field xpath="@name-ref" />
</xs:keyref>
</xs:element>
</xs:schema>
Addendum
Just following up with my revisions thanks to @PetruGardea. So unique
can be referenced by a keyref
, who knew? (not me apparently)
<xs:element name="root">
<xs:complexType>
<xs:sequence>
<xs:element name="foo" type="foo" maxOccurs="unbounded" />
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:keyref name="foo-ref" refer="foo">
<xs:selector xpath=".//foo-ref" />
<xs:field xpath="@name-ref" />
</xs:keyref>
<xs:keyref name="bar-ref" refer="bar">
<xs:selector xpath=".//bar-ref" />
<xs:field xpath="@name-ref" />
</xs:keyref>
<!--
the use of xs:unique here, in lieu of xs:key allows for
nullable "keys", retaining referential integrity with the
above defined keyrefs. awesome possum.
-->
<xs:unique name="foo">
<xs:selector xpath=".//foo" />
<xs:field xpath="@name" />
</xs:unique>
<xs:unique name="bar">
<xs:selector xpath=".//bar" />
<xs:field xpath="@name" />
</xs:unique>
</xs:element>