[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I was just following the kind of discussion which followed that mail in
xmlschema-dev between Kawaguchi-san, Henry Thompson and others.. I think
it is interesting to note:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlschema-dev/2001Oct/0130.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlschema-dev/2001Oct/0128.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlschema-dev/2001Oct/0127.html
I guess you get a range of opinions on the chameleon schemas here..
further more, you can get why try to include such a difficult thing in
this note
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlschema-dev/2001Oct/0129.html
hope this helps.. cheers and regards - murali.
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Michael Leditschke wrote:
> Dare wrote:
>
> > The advice on avoiding chameleon schemas could be fleshed out.
>
> I don't wish to enter the debate about the man vs the matter, but
> on matters of fact, the example given of chameleon schemas is
> factually incorrect, I believe.
>
> Error 1: Reference to person type in main schema.
>
> The master schema makes reference to
>
> <xs:element ref="person" maxOccurs="unbounded" />
>
> refs are treated as QNames, and without a default namespace,
> "person" is a reference to {None}person.
>
> Having no namespace, the definition of person in the included
> schema is coerced into the http://example.com namespace. Thus
> the validator should complain about the reference to person
> in the including schema and XSV and MSXML do.
>
>
> Error 2: Assertion that ref="familyName" should explictly placed in
> the http://example.com namespace.
>
> Any ref with a {None} namespace in a chameleon schema will be coerced
> into the namespace of the includer. Thus there is NO need to explicitly
> place familyName in the target namespace. Indeed, if this assertion
> were correct, chameleon schemas would be pretty useless. See
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlschema-dev/2001Oct/0123.html
>
> With error one above corrected, both XSV and MSXML validate the included
> schema without change to the included schema.
>
>
> The author's other points may or may not be valid, and the use of chameleon
> schemas may or may not be bad, but factual errors tend to cloud the issue
> and lead to suspicion about the validity of the other arguments put forward
> by the author(as distinct from suspicions about the author themselves).
>
> Regards
> Michael
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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>
>
|
