- From: Kasimier Buchcik <kbuchcik@4commerce.de>
- Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 12:17:34 +0200
- To: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Hi, ht@inf.ed.ac.uk wrote: > "Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com> writes: > > >>>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? >>> >> >>My reading is that the components derived from C are copied into the schema >>corresponding to B with no change in namespace, but when the components are >>then copied into A, the namespace is changed regardless whether they >>originated from B or C. > > > That's my reading also. I see. Are those schema construction stages and copy operations needed to ensure some of the constraints I'm possibly not aware of, or could you imagine an on-the-fly including mechanism? If the resulting schema, constructed on-the-fly, would be correct, would the sub-stage schemata still be needed? Thanks & regards, Kasimier PS: Hmm, the address of Henry Thompson was somehow mangled in my last mail.
Received on Wednesday, 6 October 2004 10:18:13 UTC