W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > February 2003

Re: schema <include>

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 20 Feb 2003 10:16:32 +0000
To: Stefan.Wachter@gmx.de
Cc: rainerbecker.mail@t-online.de (Rainer Becker), xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Message-ID: <f5bisvfntof.fsf@erasmus.inf.ed.ac.uk>

Stefan.Wachter@gmx.de writes:

> your instance document is incorrect because the <Name> element is
> declared to be unqualified. Yet, in your instance document you
> declare a default namespace that is also applied on the <Name>
> element. Therefore the <Name> element is qualified in your instance
> document which is in conflict to the declaration of the <Name>
> element.
> To my knowledge the elementFormDefault of an included schema is NOT
> overwritten by the elementFormDefault of the including schema.

I concur with Stefan's analysis.

One further point which might help -- elementFormDefault applies
_only_ to _locally_ declared elements.  Firma and Person are both
declared at the top-level (note this does not mean they are the
document element in some instance, just that their declaration is not
subordinate/local in their schema), so they _must always_ be
qualified, given that Firma (directly) and Person (via the chameleon
include rules) have a target namespace.  So Name is the only element
to which elementFormDefault applies, and this works as Stefan
summarises above.

  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                      Half-time member of W3C Team
     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
	    Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
		     URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
 [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Thursday, 20 February 2003 05:16:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:15:09 UTC