[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: grammar cache and xs:redefine
> Or is it just a bad idea to have multiple grammars with the same > namespace and avoid xs:redefine. Yes, it's a bad idea to have multiple grammars with the same namespace. And it's a good idea to avoid xs:redefine - for exactly this reason. Actually, there really are many good reasons why one wants multiple grammars for the same namespace, whether they are constructed using redefine or not. Two good use cases for this are (a) different validation rules apply to the same document at different stages of a workflow or pipeline (b) different validation rules apply to different messages that contain projections of the same business object I know several projects that are really struggling with these issues. I'm coming to the conclusion that there's a need for a concept of a named schema, which is a collection of named schema components. There's no clash if two different schemas contain different definitions of the same name. Quite how one integrates that into schema-aware XSLT processing, so that you can transform an input object conforming to type S1.T into an output object conforming to type S2.T (where S1,S2 are the schema names, and T is the type name), I don't yet know! Michael Kay
|
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
|