OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: XML Schemas: Best Practices

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • From: Richard Lanyon <rgl@decisionsoft.com>
  • To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
  • Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:14:35 +0100 (BST)

On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Roger L. Costello wrote:

[introduction to elementFormDefault="unqualified" snipped]

> Here's an example of a conforming instance document:
> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> <my:camera xmlns:my="http://www.camera.org"
>                xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/1999/XMLSchema-instance"
>                xsi:schemaLocation= "http://www.camera.org Camera.xsd">
>         <body>Ergonomically designed casing for easy handling</body>
>         <lens>300mm zoom, 1.2 f-stop</lens>
>         <manual_adaptor>1/10,000 sec to 100 sec</manual_adaptor>
> <my:camera>

Isn't there a problem here?
A document author may well see a document like the above and
try and rewrite it using a default namespace, thus:

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<camera xmlns="http://www.camera.org">
<lens>More stuff</lens>
<manual_adaptor>Even more stuff</manual_adaptor>

Except (assuming I understand this correctly, which is far from
guaranteed) that won't validate, because body, lens and manual_adaptor
are now qualified and in the wrong namespace. I'd suggest this is far
from intuitive for a document author, unless he/she knows how the
schema works, and the whole idea is that the author should be
insulated from the complexities of the schema.

Does that make sense?

Richard Lanyon (Software Engineer) |     "The medium is the message"
XML Script development,            |             - Marshall McLuhan
DecisionSoft Ltd.                  |


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS