Question

There are two different approaches for designing an XML Schema:

1. Using anonymous complexTypes
2. Using named complexTypes

My question is: which one is better?

---

I find the second one better because it avoids deep nesting and allows reuse of existing types. It is closer to best practices of Software Engineering. But I saw this page, an I am confused now:

Here are some DON’Ts.

• DO NOT try to be a master of XML Schema. It would take months.
• DO NOT use complex types, attribute declarations, and notations.
• DO NOT use local declarations.
• DO NOT use substitution groups.
• DO NOT use schema without the targetNamespace attribute (AKA
  chameleon schema.)

The fact is, you don’t lose anything by following these DON’Ts, as the
rest of this paper demonstrates.

There are some explanations, but I don’t find them good. But probably I am missing something…

To be precise I’ll give you examples of this two approaches. Examples taken from W3Schools page. It lists three methods, but I ignored the second since it is very similar to the first.

Using anonymous complexTypes:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>
<xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">

<xs:element name="shiporder">
  <xs:complexType>
    <xs:sequence>
      <xs:element name="orderperson" type="xs:string"/>
      <xs:element name="shipto">
        <xs:complexType>
          <xs:sequence>
            <xs:element name="name" type="xs:string"/>
            <xs:element name="address" type="xs:string"/>
            <xs:element name="city" type="xs:string"/>
            <xs:element name="country" type="xs:string"/>
          </xs:sequence>
        </xs:complexType>
      </xs:element>
      <xs:element name="item" maxOccurs="unbounded">
        <xs:complexType>
          <xs:sequence>
            <xs:element name="title" type="xs:string"/>
            <xs:element name="note" type="xs:string" minOccurs="0"/>
            <xs:element name="quantity" type="xs:positiveInteger"/>
            <xs:element name="price" type="xs:decimal"/>
          </xs:sequence>
        </xs:complexType>
      </xs:element>
    </xs:sequence>
    <xs:attribute name="orderid" type="xs:string" use="required"/>
  </xs:complexType>
</xs:element>

</xs:schema>

Using named complexTypes:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>
<xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">

<xs:simpleType name="stringtype">
  <xs:restriction base="xs:string"/>
</xs:simpleType>

<xs:simpleType name="inttype">
  <xs:restriction base="xs:positiveInteger"/>
</xs:simpleType>

<xs:simpleType name="dectype">
  <xs:restriction base="xs:decimal"/>
</xs:simpleType>

<xs:simpleType name="orderidtype">
  <xs:restriction base="xs:string">
    <xs:pattern value="[0-9]{6}"/>
  </xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>

<xs:complexType name="shiptotype">
  <xs:sequence>
    <xs:element name="name" type="stringtype"/>
    <xs:element name="address" type="stringtype"/>
    <xs:element name="city" type="stringtype"/>
    <xs:element name="country" type="stringtype"/>
  </xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>

<xs:complexType name="itemtype">
  <xs:sequence>
    <xs:element name="title" type="stringtype"/>
    <xs:element name="note" type="stringtype" minOccurs="0"/>
    <xs:element name="quantity" type="inttype"/>
    <xs:element name="price" type="dectype"/>
  </xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>

<xs:complexType name="shipordertype">
  <xs:sequence>
    <xs:element name="orderperson" type="stringtype"/>
    <xs:element name="shipto" type="shiptotype"/>
    <xs:element name="item" maxOccurs="unbounded" type="itemtype"/>
  </xs:sequence>
  <xs:attribute name="orderid" type="orderidtype" use="required"/>
</xs:complexType>

<xs:element name="shiporder" type="shipordertype"/>

</xs:schema>

Thank you!

Answer 1

But I saw this page, and I am confused now…

Don’t let that page influence your decision. It was written almost ten years ago (Feb 2002, according to Wayback Machine) when XML Schema was new, scary looking and poorly supported. I’ve worked briefly with the author and know him to be very sharp and pragmatic; however, I think the doc was directed at people who found XML Schema to be scary looking and poorly supported and gave them a cheat sheet for using XML Schema with minimal investment.