- From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:01:25 -0500
- To: francis@redrice.com
- Cc: Michael Shapiro <michael@creativescience.com>, xmlschema-dev@w3.org, xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org
Yes, thank you. In general I would somewhat PREFER it if you would do
appropriate editing on Q&A that are adapted for FAQ. In some cases, I
think the wording doesn't quite hold up. Feel free to take a crack at
cleaning up earlier entries you adapted from my responses as you see fit.
If there are any where you worry about changing the meaning, just send a
heads up and I will check them. Many thanks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francis Norton <francis@redrice.com>
Sent by: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org
02/16/2001 08:08 AM
Please respond to francis
To: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
cc: Michael Shapiro <michael@creativescience.com>, xmlschema-dev@w3.org,
xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org
Subject: Re: Root element
Thanks, Noah. I've updated the FAQ with this, though I've changed the Q.
to
"Can the message reader force a specific global element to be the
message root?"
and the first sentence of the reply, because I want to make the three
roles - schema author, message author, and message reader - more
explicit.
Hope that's OK -
Francis.
Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com wrote:
>
> I thought the FAQ covered this case, but I checked and it does not do so
> in detail [1]. Here's a bit more info:
>
> Q. Can any global element serve as the root of your instance when you
> validate?
> A. Yes, as far as the schema language itself is concerned, but it is
> intended that the application or processor could be parameterized to
> check. For example, consider a perfectly reasonable processor that
would
> take a command line like:
>
> validate -instance myinstance.xml -schema myschema.xsd
> -rootElementName purchaseOrder
>
> such a processor could provide the added service of checking the name of
> the root element. There are at least two reasons that the schema
language
> does not take a more rigid view of roots (a) there are situations in
which
> you truly find it useful to have different element names serve as the
root
> of a document and (b) even if purchaseOrder is the root of the
instance,
> you may decide that you only want to validate the shippingAddress. So,
> the root of the validation need not be the root of the instance
document.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> [1] http://redrice.com/schemavalid/faq/xml-schema.html#d3
>
Received on Friday, 16 February 2001 11:14:09 UTC