Composed Simple Type in XSD

Question

0.00/5 (No votes)

See more:

Hello!

I want to compose a simple type within a xsd schema.
Here a xml example:

XML

<Unit Name="milimeter" Abbr="mm" Definition="0.001 m" />

The 'Definition' attribute consists of two parts: a xsd:double ("0.001") and a custom type (UnitAbbreviation, "m", used for the 'Abbr' attribute too).
So simple types for both parts exists, but how can I join them without writing a regex which redefine both the xsd:double and UnitAbbreviation?

I look for something like this:

XML

<xs:simpleType name="UnitDefinition">
  <xs:composedType type="xsd:Double" />
  <AndHereSomeKindOfWhiteSpace />
  <xs:composedType type="UnitAbbreviation"/>
</xs:simpleType>

I am aware of the snippet beeing pseudo code...

Is this able with XSD types? Or do I have to write a big regex restriction, which covers both the xsd:double and the UnitAbbreviation? (the xsd:double should allow scientific notation...)
Thanks for replying,
Henning

Posted 12-Jun-12 7:55am

Henning Dieterichs

Add a Solution

2 solutions

Add a Solution

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

barneyman · Answer 1 · 2012-06-12T13:56:00

Solution 1

You'll have to build a huge regex ... or solve it in an alternative fashion ..

How about having child nodes that define the Unit, that way you can have multiple definitions, the XSD is easier to construct and you get easier lookups?

ie.

XML

<Unit Name="milimeter" Abbr="mm">
  <Definition Parent="metre" UnitConversion="0.001"/>
  <Definition Parent="inch" UnitConversion="0.03937"/>
</Unit>

I've got the parent/conversion logic a bit screwed there, but you get the point :)

Posted 12-Jun-12 13:56pm

barneyman

Comments

Henning Dieterichs 13-Jun-12 3:28am

Hi, thank you very much for your answer!
The idea sounds good, but I think it gets to complicated when complex units are defined (e.g. km/h or mph), which have multiple parents...
And complex types can have children, too (cubicliter, e.g.).

Greetings,
Henning

Henning Dieterichs 13-Jun-12 9:25am

Ok, I've reconsidered your answer, see my solution below.

barneyman 13-Jun-12 9:34am

I'm glad I could aid your creative process ... As an aside, I intend to implement something similar in the next rev of our product, if only so I can squeeze in 'cubits' ;)

Henning Dieterichs 13-Jun-12 9:54am

I will publish my implementation soon here on codeproject.
The system can convert (only by knowing the basic units and their factors) from km/h to mph or meters per seconds, or from centiliter to cubicmeter (I never got it right in math education ;))
My units of measure library will have another (currently top secret) feature, which is depending on this question (http://www.codeproject.com/Questions/403187/MSBuild-Resolve-Project-Reference-to-Assembly), maybe you can imagine what it will be.

Henning Dieterichs 26-Jun-12 11:58am

Now it is published:
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/404573/Units-of-Measure-Library-for-NET

Henning Dieterichs · Answer 2 · 2012-06-13T03:25:00

Mapping the n:n unit-hierarchy to the 1:n relationship of parent and children in xml will add more complexity (though it is in the sense of xml), since the format won't be extendable (you can simply add a new element to the bottom of a list, but in an hierarchy you have to specify where to add it) and composed units like speed have no real parents.

Defining units by an expression like definition="km/h" sounds more natural, but seems not to be in the sense of xml (definition within a string vs. definition through a semantic xml node).

So I combined my first solution and the solution of barneyman:

XML

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<UnitLibrary xmlns="http://www.hediet.de/xsd/unitlibrary/1.0">
  <BaseUnit Name="Meter" Abbr="m" />

  <SimpleUnit Name="Kilometer" Abbr="km" Factor="1000" UnderlayingUnit="m" />
  <SimpleUnit Name="Milimeter" Abbr="mm" Factor="0.001" UnderlayingUnit="m" />

  <BaseUnit Name="Second" Abbr="s" />

  <SimpleUnit Name="Minute" Abbr="min" Factor="60" UnderlayingUnit="s" />
  <SimpleUnit Name="Hour" Abbr="h" Factor="60" UnderlayingUnit="min" />

  <ComplexUnit Name="Kilometers per Hour" Abbr="kmh">
    <UnitPart Power="1" Unit="km" />
    <UnitPart Power="-1" Unit="h" />
  </ComplexUnit>
  <ComplexUnit Name="Meters per Second" Abbr="mps">
    <UnitPart Power="1" Unit="m" />
    <UnitPart Power="-1" Unit="s" />
  </ComplexUnit>
</UnitLibrary>

I think this will be the best.