W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > December 2000

RE: SOM

From: David Valera <dvalera@pcl-hage.nl>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:21:35 +0100
To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D1F94D8C7C1FD111A5290020AF92B1B3B03A28@INTRASERVER>
> Sorry to jump in at the end of this thread, I've been otherwise
> occupied for the last few days, but this is too misleading to go
> unchallenged: an XML Schema is _not_ an XML file.

I got scared when I saw this...

> One schema may
> correspond to many schema documents, they are _not_ the same thing,
> and cannot be made so.  Schemas involving more than one namespace are
> of necessity represented by at least a pair of schema documents.

But now I can relax. :-)

You are indeed correct, since an XML schema can be divided in different
documents. An element declared in one part (file) of the schema could have a
type which is defined in an different part (read file) of the schema. DOM
would need to be aware of the semantics of XML schema's to access the
corresponding components.

I would rather see this developed as an extension of DOM than as an
'independant object model' like Steffen is proposing.

> The appropriate objects to access from a Schema API are schema
> components.  The spec. mandates that these be available as part of the
> PSVI.  The DOM WG is working on making the PSVI available, there is
> still discussion about whether this will be a schema-specific
> facility, or done via a generic infoset-access paradigm.

PSVI? I am not sure if I missed something, but what does PSVI stand for?

David Valera
Received on Thursday, 14 December 2000 09:20:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:14:19 GMT