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

RE: Recursive import/include/redefine

From: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 09:07:10 -0700
Message-ID: <8BD7226E07DDFF49AF5EF4030ACE0B7E07A97301@red-msg-06.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Stefan Wachter" <Stefan.Wachter@gmx.de>, <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>

I also thought this was the case given 
 
Schema Representation Constraint: Redefinition Constraints and Semantics 
 
4 The appropriate case among the following must be true: 
4.1 If clause 3.1 or clause 3.2 above is satisfied, then the schema corresponding to SII’ must include not only definitions or declarations corresponding to the appropriate members of its own [children] <http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/#infoitem.element> , but also components identical to all the ·schema components· of I, with the exception of those explicitly redefined (see Individual Component Redefinition (§4.2.2) below).
4.2 If clause 3.3 above is satisfied, then the schema corresponding to SII’ must include not only definitions or declarations corresponding to the appropriate members of its own [children] <http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/#infoitem.element> , but also components identical to all the ·schema components· of I, with the exception of those explicitly redefined (see Individual Component Redefinition (§4.2.2) below), except that anywhere the ·absent· target namespace name would have appeared, the ·actual value· of the targetNamespace [attribute] <http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/#infoitem.element>  of SII’ is used (see clause 3.2 in Inclusion Constraints and Semantics (§4.2.1) for details).

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Stefan Wachter [mailto:Stefan.Wachter@gmx.de] 
	Sent: Mon 10/7/2002 8:45 AM 
	To: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk; xmlschema-dev@w3.org 
	Cc: 
	Subject: Re: Recursive import/include/redefine
	
	


	I thought that
	
	<redfine schemaLocation="b.xsd"/>
	
	is equal to
	
	<include schemaLocation="b.xsd"/>
	
	i.e. all components contained in a redefined schema can be accessed
	regardless if they are actually redefined.
	
	--Stefan
	
	
	>
	> "Lemmin, Harald" <Harald.Lemmin@softwareag.com> writes:
	>
	> > as I read from the archives, import does not works recursive:
	> > a imports b imports c does not mean: a imports c.
	>
	> That's right -- import is primarily about establishing the legitimacy
	> of referencing components from other that the target namespace.  For
	> that purpose, transitivity would not be helpful.
	>
	> > Include can be recursive:
	> > a includes b includes c means: a includes b and c ("compound schema").
	>
	> Yes.
	>
	> > Now the questions:
	>
	> > (1) redefine:
	> > a redefines b redefines c means: every item that is redefined by a may
	> be
	> > used in a and this item may be previously redefined by b from c. But
	> what
	> > has not been redefined by a cannot be used in a.
	>
	> Right, I think.
	>
	> > (2) redefine / include:
	> > a includes b redefines c means: a is assembled from itself, the global
	> > element/types of b and from the redefinitions done in b.
	> >
	> > Am I right?
	>
	> Again, yes, I believe so.
	>
	> Remember that appearances to the contrary notwithstanding, include,
	> import and redefine are all about schemas and their components, not
	> about documents.
	>
	> ht
	> --
	>   Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of
	> Edinburgh
	>           W3C Fellow 1999--2002, 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/
	>  [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged
	> spam]
	>
	
	
Received on Monday, 7 October 2002 12:07:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:14:34 GMT