[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
In article <f5bk6ozcos9.fsf@erasmus.inf.ed.ac.uk> Henry Thompson write:
>Sorry not to be clearer -- in both this and your next message, the
>things you're expressing surprise/concern about are attempts to
>understand my messages as if they were about NOTATIONs and their
>declaration and use in XML 1.0/1.1 DTDs and DTD-based validation of
>instances.
>But my message was about the simple type definition of the same name
>in W3C XML Schema, which reconstructs but does _not_ interact with the
>DTD-declared attribute type.
The consequence of this difference between DTDs and Schemas seems to
be that if you want to use notations in documents and have them be
both DTD- and Schema-valid, you must ensure that the notation names
can be expressed in the instance without the use of a prefix. If you
don't use namespaces - and thus the schema has no target namespace -
then this will happen naturally. If you do use namespaces, you must
make the notation's namespace be the default namespace at the point
where you use the notation attribute.
-- Richard
|
