cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Two external definitions for one message

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi experts,

I've got one problem:

I'm developing a new sender interface, other firm gave me 2 xsd schemas to use as external definition.

The second schema is in fact a sub-node of the first schema.

What is the correct way to manage this two schemas in XI?

I've tried to cut and paste second schema into first, but no luck because second schema has different names of the xml tags.

Now I've imported the 2 schemas as external definitions, but I think I must link them, but I don't know how.

Could you please help me?

thanks

Fabio

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

Let's say you have two xsd's with names 1.xsd(main xsd) and 2.xsd(subnode)

Import both the messages in external definitions and Save.

Now Check External references tab of 1.xsd . it will show 2.xsd

Now go to 2.xsd and add name 2.xsd in source tab of that definition. and now save and activate

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

thank you.

My problem is that the two xsd schemas are not really linked, other firm said that second schema is nested in first schema but in fact there's no xml statement in first schema that points to second schema, I've to manage that by myself, so I've written xml statements in first schema to link to the second.

I've written this statement:

<xs:include schemaLocation="TimbreFiscalDigital.xsd"/>

after first row of first schema to include the second, and then I've written:

<xs:sequence>

<xs:element ref="TimbreFiscalDigital.xsd"/>

</xs:sequence>

under the node of first schema that must contains second schema.

You think is correct?

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Kiran,

assuming xml statement are right, I've tried what you said and now the two external definitions are linked.

Now I'm creating Message Interface, in definition I put first external definition, it's right?

Problem is that in the message structure I see the second schema into a node of the first, but is defined as a simple element, when in fact is a schema that contains subelements.

What do you think is the problem?

Answers (2)

Answers (2)

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

problem solved with your help, the last problem was only a typing error, now it's ok.

Thank you!!

Former Member
0 Kudos

hello,

Check the link below.

Regards,

Phani