[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
"Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com> writes:
> The schema rec contains some contradictory statements on this.
>
> Section 3.15.3 says:
>
> "For a .QName. to resolve to a schema component of a specified kind all of
> the following must be true:
> 1 That component is a member of the value of the appropriate property of the
> schema which corresponds to the schema document within which the .QName.
> appears,"
>: in other words, component references in document A must resolve
> to something in the include tree rooted at A.
You gloss is not accurate. The REC also says, wrt the semantics of
<import> [1],
"The *schema components* (that is {type definitions}, {attribute
declarations}, {element declarations}, {attribute group
definitions}, {model group definitions}, {notation declarations}) of
a schema corresponding to a <schema> element information item with
one or more <import> element information items must include not only
definitions or declarations corresponding to the appropriate members
of its [children], but also, for each of those <import> element
information items for which clause 2 above is satisfied, a set of
*schema components* identical to all the *schema components* of I."
So the schema corresponding to a schema document is _not_ restricted
to components in that document's 'targetNamespace', and imported
components _are_ available to discharge QNames.
Action at a distance is regrettable and a source of confusion, in
specs as in object-oriented languages :-(
ht
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#src-import
--
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
Half-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
|
