- From: Michael Glavassevich <mrglavas@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:39:15 -0500
- To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
andrew.j.welch@gmail.com wrote on 01/16/2008 10:29:09 AM: > On 16/01/2008, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> wrote: > > There's a conditional inclusion mechanism in XSDL 1.1 > > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-xmlschema11-1-20070830/#cip > > > > that answers part of the requirement; it's designed to enable facilities to > > be ignored based on the version of XSDL supported by the processor. It's > > been designed in the (perhaps optimistic) hope that it can be retrofitted to > > XSDL 1.0 processors. > > Thanks - I'm being optimistic... Xerces doesn't seem to like: > > <xs:assert vc:minVersion="1.1" test="..."/> We've discussed this a bit on the Xerces-J mailing list [1] but it's not supported yet. > Is that the correct use? > > > There's nothing in the spec however that allows you to switch off assertion > > checking if you're using a 1.1 processor that supports the facility. It > > could be a product option, however. > > I was thinking more along the lines of a 1.0 process would validate > using the schema ignoring the assertions, while a 1.1 processor would > evaluate them. > > That would allow me to put assertions in the schema now, and > distribute the schema, without the need for everyone to have a 1.1 > processor to validate using it (with what would be assertion failing > being caught by the application as usual). > > Maybe I'm thinking about this wrongly... > > -- > Andrew Welch > http://andrewjwelch.com > Kernow: http://kernowforsaxon.sf.net/ [1] http://marc.info/?l=xerces-j-user&m=119548534302610&w=2 Michael Glavassevich XML Parser Development IBM Toronto Lab E-mail: mrglavas@ca.ibm.com E-mail: mrglavas@apache.org
Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2008 17:57:51 UTC