RE: Initial discussion documents

On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 20:00 +0100, Mark Birbeck wrote:
> Kasimier,
> 
> > The part about chameleon schemata seems to be incorrect on that page.
> > Chameleon schemata are schemata with no @targetNamespace, 
> > which are <include>d into a schema with a @targetNamespace. 
> > The chameleon mechanism is not intended for <import>ed schemata.
> 
> My document is actually quite out of date (although I'm not sure I agree
> with *exactly* how you have worded that).
> 
> When I was first doing this I was testing only with MSXML, which actually
> allows what I have described (an xs:import with a @namespace value, to
> import a schema with no @targetNamespace). However, when I later started
> testing with other validators I discovered the error of my ways ;) and have

Yes, the @namespace of an <import> needs to match the @targetNamespace
of the <import>ed schema document, or, if @namespace is ommitted, then
the <import>ed schema document must not have a @targetNamespace.

> since taken a different approach (I have created 'proxy' schemas that allow
> a chameleon schema to be imported into a host language using a different

Yes, that's the way to go. However, using the term "imported" can still
be misleading to others, since chameleon schemata are <include>d not
<import>ed.

> namespace to that of the host language).
> 
> I've been working with Shane on getting some of these techniques into the
> XML Schema Modularisation draft, so I haven't yet got round to updating the
> Wiki--so apologies for that.

np

By the way, with chameleon schemata, you are hitting a wobbly spot of
the XML Schema 1.0 spec. In this area, some schema processors work
differently than others do.

Regards,

Kasimier

Received on Wednesday, 5 October 2005 19:48:43 UTC