[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Hi Brian,
Yes, you are correct that the new definition of AddressType should supercede
the original one. If XML Spy doesn't accept the Mail_Stop element as a
child of Address, that sounds like an implementation bug.
Priscilla
------------------------------------------------------------------
Priscilla Walmsley priscilla@walmsley.com
Vitria Technology http://www.vitria.com
Author, Definitive XML Schema (Prentice Hall PTR)
------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Magick, Brian [mailto:Brian.Magick@COMPAQ.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 2:24 PM
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: [xml-dev] Proper implementation of <redefine>
>
>
> Question regarding the usage and implementation of redefine:
>
> As I've read in numerous texts, and as is made clear (or as clear as
> clear can be from the W3C) in Schema Primer Part 0, the <redefine>
> element will actually "replace" the external definition of a type or
> group.
>
> The redefined definition of the structure should take place
> anywhere the
> original structure was defined as a type or group. For example, (from
> the W3C Primer) if you redefine and extend AddressType, the new
> AddressType will occur anywhere the old AddressType was
> declared (within
> the same namespace). The Primer Part 0 states: "Outside of the
> redefine element, any such attempt to define a complex type with the
> same name (and in the same namespace) as the base from which
> it is being
> derived would cause an error. But in this case, there is no error, and
> the extended definition of Address becomes the only definition of
> Address." The primer continues with "Now that Address has been
> redefined, the extension applies to all schema components
> that make use
> of Address."
>
> This seems VERY clear to me that the new AddressType
> supercedes the old,
> everywhere...PERIOD.
>
> Unfortunately, a popular XML Schema editing tool with a very 007'ish
> flair to the name, (ok, no need to protect the guilty...XML
> Spy...Version 4.3 to be exact) seems to miss the proper implementation
> of <redefine>.
>
> Perhaps my understanding of <redefine> is flawed, or perhaps
> XML Spy has
> got this wrong, but when I redefine a type such as AddressType, and in
> another element in the new Schema set the type to "AddressType", it
> retains the original type definition and does not include the
> extensions
> that I've added to AddressType.
>
> The following snippet of Schema displays the structure that I
> am using:
>
> <xs:redefine schemaLocation="Address.xsd">
> <xs:complexType name="AddressType">
> <xs:complexContent>
> <xs:extension base="AddressType">
> <xs:sequence>
> <xs:element
> name="Mail_Stop" type="xs:string" minOccurs="0"/>
> </xs:sequence>
> </xs:extension>
> </xs:complexContent>
> </xs:complexType>
> </xs:redefine>
> <xs:element name="Address" type="AddressType"/>
> </xs:schema>
>
> The Address element within XML Spy does not have the Mail_Stop element
> that was just added via the <redefine> element.
>
> Any suggestions as to whether I made an error or whether this is an
> apparent implementation bug?
>
>
> Brian Magick
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
|
