- From: Savas Parastatidis <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 01:59:11 +0100
- To: "Jeni Tennison" <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Cc: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>, "Jim Webber" <jim.webber@arjuna.com>, "Paul Watson" <Paul.Watson@newcastle.ac.uk>
>
> I disagree with this assertion (which I guess makes me a purist). The
> XML Schema Recommendation states that certain types are built-in to
> the language (xs:anyType, xs:anySimpleType and the various built-in
> data types). The Rec does not state anywhere that I can see that the
> Schema-for-Schema is imported into all schemas. So to reference
> element and attribute declarations, type definitions and so on from
> the Schema-for-Schema, you must import it just as you must import a
> schema for the XML namespace if you want to use that, or a schema for
> the XHTML namespace if you want to use that.
>
Doesn't importing the XML Schema-for-Schema under the schema namespace
(http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema) will cause a problem with the
redefinition (in the same namespace) of all the XML Schema elements?
What I mean is that the {element}, {schema}, etc. infoset components are
already defined in the http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema. It is assumed
that the XML Schema processor "knows" about these infoset components.
Doesn't importing the Schema-for-Schemas redefine these infoset
components since the "name" and "namespace" properties match for all the
components? If this assertion is true, then importing the
Schema-for-Schemas shouldn't be allowed.
Just trying to clear my mind around this.
Regards,
.savas.
Received on Thursday, 3 July 2003 20:59:17 UTC