W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > October to December 2006

[Bug 2577] xsi loc = redefine loc -- what happens?

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 22:20:36 +0000
CC:
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1GUW9M-0006AW-4V@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2577





------- Comment #3 from noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com  2006-10-02 22:20 -------
Michael asks:

> what gives rise to the belief that either
> possible answer to this question has "the
> potential of two or more different versions
> of the same named definition or declaration 
> being used in the same schema"?

The original comment offers as one alternative:

> and that a redefining reference results
> in a different set of components, which will
> conflict with the first set and cause an error.

Maybe we're at cross purposes because this does say that an error will be
caused, so in that sense there's no schema.  Othewise, this clearly says that
there will be conflicting versions of what I infer to be global components in
the same symbol space with the same name.

It very clearly contrasts that with:

> Another view is that redefinition is said
> to have ubiquitous effect

So, in only one of the alternatives is the effect of redefine ubiquitious.  The
alternative, as noted above, leads to the view that a schema document
specifically including some particular document will see the "unredefined"
versions of the components declared therein, even if elsewhere a redefine has
been done that would override them.  

As I stated in my original comment, I think the statement that redefine is
pervasive should trump any inference to the contrary that might be drawn from
what's stated in relation to <xsd:include>  I'm not specifically saying that's
my reading of <xsd:include>, but apparently the commentator found an ambiguity.

Noah
Received on Monday, 2 October 2006 22:20:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:13:11 GMT