Question

我接着又提出以下内容:minOccurs=“0”和nillable=“true”。

I was reading this article and now in my WSDL I m not sure if using both is worth it. The article gives a good example of representing arrays where you might have null values interspersed throughout, as this can t be done with just minOccurs="0". Now, the convention I ve been going with is that if an element isn t optional it is not nillable. The difference as I understand it, and where my question lies, is that by applying the nillable property to an element, I am saying that you can pass in the XSD equivalent of a NULL value? Otherwise, an element without the nillable property, has to have a value within the restriction placed on it?

Answer 1

你们需要决定是否考虑将XML作为XML,还是想把 X(或其他)物体从这里传到这里。

在XML中,有线可允许建造<代码><myelement xsi:nil= real />,作为像NCL一样的明确缺席价值指标。这与仅仅<代码><myelement/>有别之处。两者完全不同。因此,在研究XML时,你必须区分四起案件:

<!-- nothing -->
<myElement attr1= true >some content</myElement>
<myElement/>
<myElement xsi:nil= true />

另一方面,如果你主要关心 Java——或许是因为你正在使用SOAP,那么,你需要思考 Java是如何回播的。

对于从目标继承的任何 Java项目,日本宇宙航空研究开发机构和其他制图技术需要一种处理无效价值的方法。值得注意的是这样做的方法。如果你对可能成为标的物的物品表示不快,则工具包将无休止地利用阵列来寻找出代表缺席的办法。

另一方面,如果你有一阵列,就会铭记,it/em>阵列是一个目标,可以宣布无效。因此,每个工具箱必须区分零件和零件。

另一方面,如果你有某种原始类型(例如int),则可以产生问题,因为没有从Xsi:nil到原始数据。

友情链接