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

Re: [Moderator Action] problem with validating against multiple, independent schemas

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 18 May 2000 18:16:57 +0100
To: Steve Monk <smonk@geocities.com>
Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org, steve.monk@reuters.com, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <f5bzopn93sm.fsf@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Steve Monk <smonk@geocities.com> writes:

> Hello.  I hope this is the appropriate forum for this message --
> apologies if it isn't.
> 
> I'm trying to validate an instance document that has been created using
> two separate schemas.  Most of the examples of using multiple
> schemas that I've encountered are cases where one schema is imported
> into, and used to define elements in, the other.  But I want the two
> schemas to remain independent until validation time.   The example given
> in sections 5.5 and 5.6 of "XML Schema Part 0: Primer" seems to
> be doing almost what I want, so it seems like it should be possible.
> 
> Below is some markup to illustrate what I'm after.  I've tried running
> this through two processors: Oracle XML Schema Validator 0.9 Alpha
> and XML Spy 3.0 Beta.  The Oracle processor doesn't like the reference
> to the second schema -- it complains that the "Data" element (in the
> instance) is invalid (and then, of course, that all children have
> invalid namespaces).  XML Spy has the opposite problem:  it claims that
> everything from the second namespace is valid in the instance even when
> I change the instance so that it DOES contain invalid elements. (For
> example, I tried mis-spelling "Item" as "Ite" and XML Spy went happily
> right over it.)  So, one processor refuses to accept the second
> namespace, and the other processor accepts it but then doesn't use it.
> (By the way, I also tried obvious alternatives such as in-lining the
> namespace in the "Data" element, as in the Primer example mentioned
> above, but nothing seems to work.)
> 
> So, I'm stuck, and my questions are:  Is it in fact possible to do what
> I'm trying to do?  If so, is my markup all right?  If so, does anyone
> know
> of a processor that will validate the instance properly?
> 
> Many thanks for any feedback.
> 
> Steve Monk
> 
> 
> 
> INSTANCE:
> 
> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> <ImportedStuff xmlns="http://www.myorg.com/languageOne"
>  xmlns:two="http://www.myorg.com/languageTwo"
>  xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/1999/XMLSchema-instance"
>  xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.myorg.com/languageOne languageOne.xsd
>     http://www.myorg.com/languageTwo languageTwo.xsd">
> 
>  <Description>
>   <Comment>Here is some data based on the other schema</Comment>
>   <Author>Steve Monk</Author>
>  </Description>
>  <ExternalData>
>   <two:Data>
>    <two:Order>
>     <two:Item>Amplifier</two:Item>
>     <two:Quantity>2</two:Quantity>
>    </two:Order>
>    <two:Order>
>     <two:Item>CD Player</two:Item>
>     <two:Quantity>4</two:Quantity>
>    </two:Order>
>   </two:Data>
>  </ExternalData>
> </ImportedStuff>
> 
> 
> SCHEMA ONE ("languageOne.xsd"):
> 
> <schema targetNamespace="http://www.myorg.com/languageOne"
>  xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/XMLSchema"
>  xmlns:one="http://www.myorg.com/languageOne">
> 
>  <element name="ImportedStuff">
>   <complexType>
>    <element ref="one:Description" maxOccurs="1"/>
>    <element ref="one:ExternalData"/>
>   </complexType>
>  </element>
> 
>  <element name="Description" type="one:descriptionType"/>
>  <element name="ExternalData" type="one:externalDataType"/>
> 
>  <complexType name="descriptionType">
>   <element name="Comment" type="string"/>
>   <element name="Author" type="string"/>
>  </complexType>
> 
>  <complexType name="externalDataType">
>   <any namespace="##other" processContents="strict" minOccurs="1"/>
>  </complexType>
> 
> </schema>
> 
> 
> SCHEMA TWO ("languageTwo.xsd"):
> 
> <schema targetNamespace="http://www.myorg.com/languageTwo"
>  xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/XMLSchema"
>  xmlns:two="http://www.myorg.com/languageTwo">
> 
>  <element name="Data">
>   <complexType>
>    <element name="Order" type="two:orderType" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>   </complexType>
>  </element>
> 
>  <element name="Item" type="string"/>
>  <element name="Quantity" type="integer"/>
> 
>  <complexType name="orderType">
>   <element ref="two:Item"/>
>   <element ref="two:Quantity"/>
>  </complexType>
> </schema>


Your plan is fine, your instance is fine, your schemas have a small
bug in them, which doesn't explain the failures you report.

Here's a fragment of the output from the validator you didn't try,
namely XSV [1]:

Validation error: in unnamed entity at line 9 char 3 of file:/projects/ltg/users/ht/xml/xmlschema/monk/instance.xml:
 element {http://www.myorg.com/languageOne}:Comment not allowed here in element {http://www.myorg.com/languageOne}:Description
  1: {None}:Comment->2
  2: {None}:Author->3
* 3:

There were 17 errors of this sort, all arising from your (perfectly
reasonable) use of local element declarations.  As currently spec'ed,
elements declared locally must occur unqualified in instances.  To
validate your document as written, with no errors and the <any ...strict/>
operating as you intended, I added the following to the <schema>
element of your schemas:

 elementFormDefault="qualified"

Try making that edit and giving the result to XSV -- you'll see you've 
got the effect you wanted.

ht

[1] http://cgi.w3.org/cgi-bin/xmlschema-check
-- 
  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
          W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team
     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
	    Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
		     URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
Received on Thursday, 18 May 2000 13:17:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:14:17 GMT