W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xsd-databinding@w3.org > November 2006

RE: Elements of type xs:schema

From: Erik Johnson <ejohnson@epicor.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 07:20:43 -0800
Message-ID: <BF9C5B9528B9C246BC41C7B988C49C87025A7AA9@slate.americas.epicor.net>
To: <public-xsd-databinding@w3.org>
Hi Paul,

I think Issue 68 covers this -- sorry I missed that.

-----Original Message-----
From: paul.downey@bt.com [mailto:paul.downey@bt.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 7:13 AM
To: Erik Johnson
Cc: public-xsd-databinding@w3.org
Subject: Re: Elements of type xs:schema

Hi Erik!

> I have noticed very uneven support for elements 
> of type xs:schema declared within a schema.  

right, it's not predefined type like say xs:string, but I get your drift ..

> Some toolkits say that the Xml Schema namespace is not declared, 
> but you can't really import it because there is no real normative 
> schema for XML Schema that completely conforms to the XML Schema spec.  

This sounds closely related to SSUE-68:
"xs:import of Schema 1.0 namespace"

You could, of course, give a schemaLocation of
(not normative, but as good as, or write one yourself ..) 
but that's not very desirable I guess.

> Some databases (like SQL 2005) simply reject schemas 
> with element declarations of type xs:schema. 

sounds like it's not "Basic" then.

> I'm not sure what the best solution is other than recommending 
> toolkits somehow support schemas for documents that themselves contain

that's the main goal of our "Advanced" document, AIUI, a collection
of schema patterns in common use that implementers can then 
ensure they support.

I wonder if this is the same as ISSUE-68:

or if we need to open a separate issue. I'll create an issue,
"example" and a pattern.


Received on Monday, 6 November 2006 16:17:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:58:13 UTC