Re: Multiple XML schema files for a common target namespace (PROV-ISSUE-608)

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Luc Moreau <> wrote:
> The schema uses some xml constructs such as abstract elements and
> substitution groups, just because we want to split the schema
> in several files.

No, also to give a defined place for third-party extensions to put
their thing. If I am doing stianprov.xsd - how should I do it
otherwise? Copy-paste everything from prov.xsd and redefine it?

Do the abstract elements and substitution group cause say the JAXB
generated classes to look horrible, or have lots of getAny()
properties requiring casting etc? Perhaps we should have a go using it
with the leading frameworks for Java (JaxB) and .NET (?) before we
dismiss it.

The XSD spec is after all 9 years old.. is this still something 'new'
and 'dangerous'?

> but define documentElements in the root file, defining the union over all
> elements in all the files.
> Same structure, but without abstract elements and substitution groups.

This would be a bigger maintenance problem (more chance of getting it
wrong somewhere), and would not work for third-party extensions.

Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester

Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2013 13:56:19 UTC