- 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