W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > July 2002

RE: restriction question

From: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 16:40:31 -0700
Message-ID: <8BD7226E07DDFF49AF5EF4030ACE0B7E06621E24@red-msg-06.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Calvin Smith" <calvins@SIMS.Berkeley.EDU>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>

Your schema is invalid and the reason is given in the error message
provided by Xerces which has nothing to do with the types being in
different namespaces. Although the problem is due to namespaces. 

Both schemas define local elements yet set
elementFormDefault="qualified". This means that the Street, State and
Country elements in schema 1 are from the http://www.test.com/sample
namespace while the State and Country elements in schema 2 are from the
http://www.test.com/sample2 namespace. Thus SimplerAddressType is not a
valid restriction of AddressType. To solve this problem you can do two
things 

1.) Change the value of elementFormDefault to unqualified or remove it
entirely since the default is unqualified. 

2.) Define the Street, State and Country in a single schema [in schema
1, schema 2 or a new one] and reference those types from your complex
type definitions. 

-- 
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM 
He who laughs last didn't catch on very fast, did he? 

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Calvin Smith [mailto:calvins@SIMS.Berkeley.EDU] 
> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 4:23 PM
> To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
> Subject: restriction question
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Is it possible to derive by restriction, where the derived 
> type is in a different namespace than the base type?  The 
> spec, at 3.9.6, doesn't explicitly say, so I think it's 
> probably okay.  Xerces2, however, complains that it isn't a 
> valid restriction.
> 
> This illustrates the problem:
> 
> schema 1:
> 
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <xsd:schema targetNamespace="http://www.test.com/sample"
> xmlns="http://www.test.com/sample"
> xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
> elementFormDefault="qualified" attributeFormDefault="unqualified">
>   <xsd:complexType name="AddressType">
>     <xsd:sequence>
>       <xsd:element name="Street" type="xsd:string" minOccurs="0"/>
>       <xsd:element name="State" type="xsd:string" minOccurs="0"/>
>       <xsd:element name="Country" type="xsd:string" minOccurs="0"/>
>     </xsd:sequence>
>   </xsd:complexType>
> </xsd:schema>
> 
> schema2:
> 
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <xsd:schema xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
> elementFormDefault="qualified" attributeFormDefault="unqualified"
> xmlns:s="http://www.test.com/sample"
> targetNamespace="http://www.test.com/sample2"
> xmlns="http://www.test.com/sample2" >
>   <xsd:import namespace="http://www.test.com/sample" 
> schemaLocation="sample.xsd"/>
>   <xsd:complexType name="SimplerAddressType">
>     <xsd:complexContent>
>       <xsd:restriction base="s:AddressType">
>         <xsd:sequence>
>           <xsd:element name="State" type="xsd:string"/>
>           <xsd:element name="Country" type="xsd:string"/>
>         </xsd:sequence>
>       </xsd:restriction>
>     </xsd:complexContent>
>   </xsd:complexType>
>   <xsd:element name="Address" type="SimplerAddressType"/> 
> </xsd:schema>
> 
> And the instance document:
> 
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <Address xmlns="http://www.test.com/sample2"
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
> xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.test.com/sample2 sample2.xsd">
>   <State>Ontario</State>
>   <Country>Canada</Country>
> </Address>
> 
> Xerces issues the following error message upon trying to 
> validate the instance document against schema2:
> 
> Error:  org.xml.sax.SAXParseException: rcase-Recurse.2: There 
> is not a complete functional mapping between the particles .
> Error:  org.xml.sax.SAXParseException: 
> derivation-ok-restriction.5.3: Error for type 
> 'SimplerAddressType'.  The particle  of the type is not a 
> valid restriction of the particle of the base.
> 
> 
> I read what I thought was the relevant part of the schema 
> (3.9.*), and it seemed like this is derivation is okay, but 
> Xerces doesn't like it, and a similar kind of restriction was 
> giving XML Spy trouble, too.
> 
> Any advice?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> calvin
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 22 July 2002 19:41:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:55:57 UTC