W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > January 2008

Re: Implementations/Non-Implementations of xs:redefine?

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:01:58 +0000
To: Eliot Kimber <ekimber@reallysi.com>
Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
Message-ID: <f5br6grw10p.fsf@hildegard.inf.ed.ac.uk>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Eliot Kimber writes:

> Having thought it about just now, it seems clear that the redefine
> feature definitely precludes caching of modules-as-redefined used via
> xs:include (that is, modules in the same namespace or no-namespace)
> and might preclude caching). The best you could do is cache modules in
> their unmodified state and apply redefines dynamically as you process
> top-level schemas.

Right -- so my point would be, _this_ case at least is not a
corner-case wrt xs:redefine as such, but rather an issue for
namespace/schema/cache management in multiple-validation-session
contexts.  Many/most of the relevant issues might arise without
redefine being involved at all, e.g. if I have two documents which
share a namespace but have xsi:schema-location hints pointing to
differing schemas (e.g. different versions) for that namespace.

ht
- -- 
 Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                     Half-time member of W3C Team
    2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.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]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHhNPWkjnJixAXWBoRAmckAJ9qBNHxprgrqO/jl/uldBx9tdQ99gCeJGUk
bLOYqRaajzo3j8A6PDMhIxM=
=phfU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 9 January 2008 14:02:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:15:01 GMT