W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > November 2003

anybody use dynamic property of xercesJ 2

From: Dean Hiller <dhiller@avaya.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:30:46 -0700
Message-ID: <3FBA7366.1000403@avaya.com>
To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org

Hi all,
    I don't really feel like joining yet another e-mail list for one 
question, so I thought I would ask here and see if anybody knows first. 
 I am getting the following error from xercesJ 2.

ERROR: cvc-elt.4.2:  Cannot resolve 'ava:ExtendedElement' to a type 
definition for element 'extensions'.

I have the following xml
<Root xmlns:xsi="http://..../XMLSchema-instance"
                xsi:schemaLocation="http://originalschema schema.xsd"
                xmlns="http://originalschema"
                xmlns:ava="http://www.avaya.com">
 <Element xsi:type="ava:ExtendedElement">
    <data1>some data</:data1>
    <ava:data2>more data</ava:data2>
 </Element>
</Root>

Notice, the ExtendedElement is in a different namespace.  I set the 
xerces parser to do dynamic validation and give it the location of the 
one schema I want to validate against.....
parser.setFeature("http://xml.org/sax/features/validation", true);
parser.setFeature("http://apache.org/xml/features/validation/schema", true);
parser.setFeature("http://apache.org/xml/features/validation/dynamic", 
true);
parser.setProperty("http://apache.org/xml/properties/schema/external-schemaLocation",
                "http://originalschema original.xsd");

Notice, I do not set the location of the avaya schema.  I don't want it, 
and only want to make sure stuff is valid against the originalschema(to 
maintain compatibility).  I ignore anything not from the originalschema 
namespace to maintain compatibility with other companies too that adhere 
to the standard...ie I use no proprietary features, only ones in the 
standard.

Why am I getting the error then?  I thought it was xerces was only 
supposed to validate against a schema it had when the dynamic feature 
was set?  It doesn't have the avaya schema, so shouldn't it just skip it 
and only validate Element and the nested data inside Element since they 
are part of the original namespace.

thanks for any help on this,
Dean
Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2003 14:30:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:14:40 GMT