- From: Eddie Robertsson <eddie@allette.com.au>
- Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 09:41:27 +1100
- To: Mark Feblowitz <mfeblowitz@frictionless.com>
- CC: "'Martin Gudgin'" <marting@develop.com>, "Xmlschema-Dev (E-mail)" <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Hi Mark, > What do you use to validate with MSXML 4? Is there particular VB or > javascript that you use? The Topologi Schematron Validator uses MSXML4 as its W3C XML Schema validator. It's free and can be downloaded from [1]. Cheers, /Eddie [1] www.topologi.com > > > I know it sounds old-fashioned, but I sure wish there was a command line > executable for me to run. > > Of course, better yet would be a full interactive development environment. > XML Spy uses its own validating parser (even though it uses MSXML for its > XSL processing). > > Any pointers would be appreciated. > > Mark > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > Mark Feblowitz [t] 617.715.7231 > Frictionless Commerce Incorporated [f] 617.495.0188 > XML Architect [e] > mfeblowitz@frictionless.com > 400 Technology Square, 9th Floor > Cambridge, MA 02139 > www.frictionless.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Gudgin [mailto:marting@develop.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 5:47 AM > To: Eric van der Vlist; xmlschema-dev@w3.org > Subject: Re: Restricting substitution groups? > > Eric, > > My take on this is that it is OK. > > The table shown under Particle Valid: Restriction could be said to be > misleading as it forbids base of element and derived of choice. Perhaps one > way of thinking about it is that the element ref is in fact a ref to a > choice group rather than an element decl and hence corresponds to a choice > particle. However, I agree that Clause 2 of RecurseLax[1] is problematic in > this case. > > Sounds to me like the easiest fix is to say, when the choice your > restricting is in fact a synthetic choice due to a substitution group then > the order rule does not apply. > > I note that Xerces 1.4.4 and MSXML 4.0 both deal with your schema ( and > instance crufted up by me ) perfectly well. > > Gudge > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#rcase-RecurseLax > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Eric van der Vlist" <vdv@dyomedea.com> > To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org> > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 4:38 PM > Subject: Restricting substitution groups? > > > Given that a substitution group is kind of equivalent to xs:choice: > > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#cos-particle-restrict > > > > > > 2.1 Any top-level element declaration particle (in R or B) which is the > > {substitution group affiliation} of one or more other element > > declarations is treated as if it were a choice group whose {min occurs} > > and {max occurs} are those of the particle, and whose {particles} > > consists of one particle with {min occurs} and {max occurs} of 1 for the > > top-level element declaration and for each of the declarations in its > > ·substitution group·. > > > > Does that mean that we can restrict substitution groups? > > > > If for instance I have: > > > > <xs:element name="head"/> > > <xs:element name="a" substitutionGroup="head"/> > > <xs:element name="b" substitutionGroup="head"/> > > <xs:element name="c" substitutionGroup="head"/> > > > > and: > > > > <xs:complexType name="base"> > > <xs:sequence> > > <xs:element ref="head"/> > > </xs:sequence> > > </xs:complexType> > > > > is > > > > <xs:complexType name="derived"> > > <xs:complexContent> > > <xs:restriction base="base"> > > <xs:sequence> > > <xs:choice> > > <xs:element ref="a"/> > > <xs:element ref="b"/> > > </xs:choice> > > </xs:sequence> > > </xs:restriction> > > </xs:complexContent> > > </xs:complexType> > > > > a valid restriction? > > > > I guess not since it doesn't seem to match the condition for restricting > > choices: > > > > Schema Component Constraint: Particle Derivation OK (Choice:Choice -- > > RecurseLax) > > For a choice group particle to be a ·valid restriction· of another > > choice group particle all of the following must be true: > > 1 R's occurrence range is a valid restriction of B's occurrence range as > > defined by Occurrence Range OK (§3.9.6); > > 2 There is a complete ·order-preserving· functional mapping from the > > particles in the {particles} of R to the particles in the {particles} of > > B such that each particle in the {particles} of R is a ·valid > > restriction· of the particle in the {particles} of B it maps to as > > defined by Particle Valid (Restriction) (§3.9.6). > > NOTE: Although the ·validation· semantics of a choice group does not > > depend on the order of its particles, derived choice groups are required > > to match the order of their base in order to simplify checking that the > > derivation is OK. > > > > The question should then probably be which is the order of the elements > > of a substitution group when they are mapped to a xs:choice during > > validation (and how can this be used to restrict a substitution group) ? > > > > Thanks > > > > Eric > > -- > > See you in Orlando for XML 2001. > > http://www.xmlconference.net/xmlusa/ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com > > http://xsltunit.org http://4xt.org http://examplotron.org > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2002 17:31:11 UTC