- From: Kasimier Buchcik <kbuchcik@4commerce.de>
- Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:03:29 +0200
- To: "<\"ht@inf.ed.ac.uk\"" <"Henry S. Thompson"@mail.firmenpost.de>
- CC: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Hi, ht@inf.ed.ac.uk wrote: > No. That would leave all internal references undischarged. It is > equivalent to constructing a schema for the included document, then > replacing ·absent· with the relevant TNS everywhere in the components > thereof called for in 3.2.1 and 3.2.2. > > Note it is because of chameleon include that a list of schema > documents is _not_ sufficient to determine a schema -- you need a > labelled directed graph, with the labels being the TNS. Does this mean as well, that if a schema document (A) with an existing target namespace includes a schema document (B) with no target namespace, which, in turn, includes a schema document (C), the target namespace of (B) will still be 'absent' when the constraints for including of (C) are applied? IOW, does this chameleon-effect touch the first level of includes only? Regards, Kasimier
Received on Wednesday, 6 October 2004 09:04:11 UTC