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

Re: XML Schema Checklist

• From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
• To: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>
• Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 12:17:49 -0400

G. Ken Holman scripsit:

> If you need W3C Schema 1.1, go ahead and use it based on your
> requirements.  But using it imposes no constraint on the XML
> declaration of an XML document being validated with W3C Schema (or
> any other constraint language).

There is a tiny amount of coupling between XML 1.1 and XSD 1.1.
An XSD 1.1 process is permitted to use either the XML 1.0 or XML 1.1
definition of names.  In particular, the approach of using the XML
1.1 definition just when validating an XML 1.1 document is endorsed.
An XSD 1.0 processor is compelled, for conformance, to use the XML 1.0
definition only.  Unfortunately, there is no standard way of overriding
either behavior in XSD 1.1, although XSD processors SHOULD provide a
non-standard one.

At any rate, that is what XSD 1.1 says, although the version of XML 1.0
it cites is the Fifth Edition, which has the same definition of names
s XML 1.1.  So all the above may be a dead letter.

-- 
John Cowan      cowan@ccil.org        http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
        Is it not written, "That which is written, is written"?

• References:
  • XML Schema Checklist
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
  • Re: XML Schema Checklist
    • From: Martin Honnen <Martin.Honnen@gmx.de>
  • RE: XML Schema Checklist
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
  • Re: XML Schema Checklist
    • From: Timothy Cook <timothywayne.cook@gmail.com>
  • Re: XML Schema Checklist
    • From: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>