- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:03:35 +0100
- To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Hi,
it may be because it's starting to be a bit late at the end of a long day, but
I'm having trouble figuring out issues to do with cross-schema derivation. It'll
probably be easier to explain with an example:
Schema A
<schema
xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema'
xmlns:A='AAA'
targetNamespace='AAA'
>
<attribute name='attrA' form='qualified' type='string'/>
<element name='eltA' form='qualified' type='string'/>
<complexType name='ctA'>
<sequence>
<element ref='A:eltA'/>
<element name='locEltA' type='string'/>
</sequence>
<attribute ref='A:attrA'/>
<attribute name='locAttrA' type='string'/>
</complexType>
</schema>
Schema B
<schema
xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema'
xmlns:A='AAA'
xmlns:B='BBB'
targetNamespace='BBB'
>
<import namespace='AAA'/>
<element name='eltB' type='A:ctA'/>
</schema>
How does locality and qualification come into play here? Is it straightforward
or do some rules come into play? I tried the spec but I may be a bit thick today :)
Would the following be a valid instance (provided already declared namespaces):
<B:eltB A:attrA='' locAttrA=''>
<A:eltA/>
<locEltA/>
</B:eltB>
As you can see, I'm concerned with how the locality/qualification kludge
propagates against schema boundaries.
Thanks,
--
Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Research Engineer, Expway
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE 8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
Received on Thursday, 21 November 2002 13:04:05 UTC