- 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