[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: XSD processContents attribute usage question

• To: "Andrew S. Townley" <andrew.townley@b...>
• Subject: Re: XSD processContents attribute usage question
• From: ht@i... (Henry S. Thompson)
• Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 11:39:00 +0000
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <1140804482.13220.122.camel@macross> (Andrew S. Townley's message of "Fri, 24 Feb 2006 18:08:02 +0000")
• References: <1140804482.13220.122.camel@macross>
• User-agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.17 (linux)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Andrew S. Townley writes:

> . . .

> I re-read the XSD spec in this area and hacked around with some examples
> using xmllint, just so I could prove the way I thought it should work. 
> If our intent is to allow only elements defined in subsequent versions
> of said schema to be used within the extension point, as I understand
> the mechanism, the value of processContents for the any refrence MUST be
> "lax".  This ensures that a client with an older version of the schema
> can validate my new message containing the hot salami, and my newer
> client can correctly determine if my message contains salami past the
> sell-by date, because it knows about the new element(s).
>
> Like I said, based on a few examples, this works the way I would
> expect.  However, I was wondering if the great wide world could see any
> potential problems with using a value of "lax" to achieve what we
> intend.

That's precisely what processContents="lax" was designed for, you're
doing the 'right thing'.

ht
- -- 
 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@i...
                   URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEAuTUkjnJixAXWBoRAqiEAJ0b5oCdvzAVkONs0jGVMt788SsA0ACeIbhI
9S9whTMUOM7vkBqVLbK18m4=
=l5MI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XSD processContents attribute usage question
    • From: "Andrew S. Townley" <andrew.townley@b...>

• References:
  • XSD processContents attribute usage question
    • From: "Andrew S. Townley" <andrew.townley@b...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML Fragments
• Next by Date: Re: XSD processContents attribute usage question
• Previous by thread: XSD processContents attribute usage question
• Next by thread: Re: XSD processContents attribute usage question
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread