- From: Biron,Paul V <Paul.V.Biron@kp.org>
- Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 15:21:26 -0700
- To: "'Elena Litani'" <elitani@ca.ibm.com>, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: Elena Litani [SMTP:elitani@ca.ibm.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:21 PM > To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > Subject: PSVI: {document} property > > > The definition for {namespace schema information information items} [1] > includes 3 properties - {schema namespace}, {schema components}, {schema > documents}. The XML Schema Recommendation specifies that the {schema > components} property could be empty: > [[ > The {schema components} property is provided for processors which wish > to provide a single access point to the components of the schema which > was used during assessment. Lightweight processors are free to leave it > empty.. > ]] > > On the other hand, the specification seems to require that the > {documents} property should be exposed by all (including lightweight) > processors. Since exposing schema documents is as expensive as exposing > schema components, this requirement seems unreasonable, thus looks as a > bug in the spec. > What makes you think that the [schema documents] property is any more "required" than [schema components]? The REC says that [schema documents] can be empty as well: A (possibly empty) set of schema document information items, with properties and values as follows, for each schema document which contributed components to the schema, and whose targetNamespace matches the sibling [schema namespace] property above (or whose targetNamespace was ·absent· but that contributed components to that namespace by being <include>d by a schema document with that targetNamespace as per Assembling a schema for a single target namespace from multiple schema definition documents (§4.2.1)). pvb
Received on Wednesday, 4 September 2002 19:05:18 UTC