[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: misprocessing namespaces (was Re: There is a
From: "Tim Bray" <tbray@t...> > I think xml:include is probably a better stab at a solution > to the problem, but I also think we don't have enough experience > to know how big/important the inclusion problem is, and what the > right answer to it is. -Tim XInclude defines no processing order: it says it is an infoset-to-infoset transformation. So anyone who wants to schema-validate XML documents before XInclusion will need to make a version of their schema that sprinkles XInclude elements at appropriate places as alternatives to content, and then, potentially, another post-XInclusion infoset schema. However, since the top-level schemaLocation attributes are not re-written by the XInclude processing, AFAIK, it seems that the post-include infoset is the more natural choice for doing validation: especially since how documents are divided into entities or fragments is usually dependent on pragmatic constraints that are not the kinds of things that one would make a schema for. I wonder if XML Schemas should be revised to include some kind of new "nill" element particle, which would allow partial validation of documents with xincludes. But then the problem of what it means in an ANY group would come up, and so on, so that seems unlikely. So it seems to me that pre-inclusion infoset schema-validation is really only useful for specific production purposes, while post-inclusion infoset schema-validation is the processing model we should expect for when using public schemas. Cheers Rick Jelliffe
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|