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

Re: Namespaces 'n Schemas

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Namespaces 'n Schemas
• From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
• Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 18:03:42 GMT
• Cc:
• In-reply-to: <NDBBKGBEKKCNMDLMKFOIMEHMDNAA.Jim.Theriot@P...>
• Organization: HCRC, University of Edinburgh

In article <NDBBKGBEKKCNMDLMKFOIMEHMDNAA.Jim.Theriot@P...> you write:

>According to the Namespaces spec, each element in an XML document (qualified
>or unqualified) has a type name comprised of a local name and an optional
>namespace name.

The term "element type" as used in the Namespaces spec is inherited
from SGML.  In SGML's DTDs (and XML's, of course) there are no local
declarations, so "element types" match one-to-one with ELEMENT
declarations.

XML Schemas do indeed change this.  Even in an instance that doesn't
use namespaces, the same "element type" may be validated by different
element declarations in different places.

>Would the namespace
>associations resolved by the Namespaces algorithm ever be different than the
>association resolved according to the XML Schema spec?

No, because XML Schema doesn't go so far as to put the unqualified
local elements in namespace of their parent.  It doesn't, in
particular, change their [namespace name] property in the infoset.  It
just chooses a declaration to validate them against based on the
namespace of their parent.

-- Richard

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Namespaces 'n Schemas
    • From: "Jim Theriot" <Jim.Theriot@p...>

• References:
  • Namespaces 'n Schemas
    • From: "Jim Theriot" <Jim.Theriot@p...>

• Prev by Date: Namespaces 'n Schemas
• Next by Date: RE: Namespaces 'n Schemas
• Previous by thread: Namespaces 'n Schemas
• Next by thread: RE: Namespaces 'n Schemas
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread