[xsd-users] Relating XSD identifiers to C++ identifiers

[Boris Kolpackov]

Iain Sharp <isharp at atis.org> writes:

> Yes, this is exactly what it is. The code and naming is correct (according
> to the defined behaviour of CS), but my point is that the description in
> doxygen says something different from what CS has actually done, especially
> in terms of how it relates to the original schema.
> 
> A more accurate description of the class would be:
>
> "Class corresponding to the instance of an anonymous type of attribute
> announcedAttribute in schema type blahBlahBlah."

Yes, and it would have been even better if there were no schemas with
anonymous types. But some people believe such schemas are "good enough".
For such schemas (and such people) we do a transformation pass before
code generation and assign names to all anonymous types. While this
looses the information that you are looking for, we call it "good
enough". And I think that's fair.

Boris