[xsd-users] Attributes not found from imported schemas

[mhoffm1060 at aol.com]

Hi Boris,
 
> Hi Mark,

> mhoffm1060 at aol.com <mhoffm1060 at aol.com> writes:

> > Another question if I may: is this usual in the XML world (to ignore
> > additional imports of the same namespace)?

> I know that this is how Xerces-C++ works. I am also pretty sure that
> Xerces-J works the same way since they have a similar XML Schema
> processor architecture. I don't know about other XML Schema
> processors but I would imagine most of them use namespaces to identify
> grammars (see below). There is an online service that allows you to
> test several XML Schema processors. You may want to try that:

> http://www.mel.nist.gov/msid/XML_testbed/validation.html


Cool.  Thanks for the link.

> > I was reading the spec (http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#composition-schemaImport
> > see Note an the end of section: 4.2.3 References to schema components across
> > namespaces?), and while the spec allows this, it mentions that this
> > is risky behavior.

> The only proper way to support multi-import'ing is to parse every file
> and detect duplicate declarations/definitions. There is no way to use
> schemaLocation to figure out if it is the same resource because of
> aliasing, etc. So while the spec may say it is risky, processor
> implementers may say that it's the only reasonable way to do it
> (performance and complexity-wise).

That's what I was thinking.

> > I'm asking because the entity that we receive these schema from declare
> > that they are compliant to the above spec? ( Apparently they are ), but
> > if it is an industry practice to ignore the later imports, I'll have
> > some leverage to get them to change the structure.

> I think, especially in case of XML Schema, it is not very smart to use
> the spec as an excuse to do things in ways that don't work across widely-
> used schema processors.

 


Hopefully they will see it that way.

> Also, for what it's worth, we have a large repository of schemas, both
> public and proprietary. I haven't seen a single schema that had the
> same property as yours. This makes me think that the industry generally
> avoids having such a structure in their schemas for some reason.
 
Good information.  Thanks.

> Boris
 
Again thanks for your response, it is very helpful.
 
Mark



________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/text.htm?ncid=aolcmp00050000000003