Mukul Gandhi <muk...@apache.org> wrote on 02/13/2010 03:33:29 AM: > Here are the answers, to the questions you asked that I'm aware of: > > On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Olivier Rossel > <olivier.ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > > - does substitutionGroup still require the newer definition to be a > > valid derivation of the original group? > > I don't think, this has changed. Please refer, > http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-1/#Element_Equivalence_Class which > says: > <quote> > All such members must have type definitions which are either the same > as the head's type definition or derived from it. > </quote> > > > - is it possible to substitute a namespaced element for a > > non-namespaced element? at the moment, in XSD 1.0, i could not mention > > a non-namespaced element from inside a namespaced schema. > > I don't think, this was disallowed in XSD 1.0 as well. Please refer, > http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#Declarations_Summary (section, > "2.2.2.2 Element Substitution Group") which says: > <quote> > Any top-level element declaration can serve as the defining member, or > head, for an element substitution group. Other top-level element > declarations, _regardless of target namespace_, can be designated as > members of the substitution group headed by this element. > </quote>
He may have been thinking of unqualified local element declarations. You can only refer to globals. > > - will xs:redefine still exist in XSD 1.1? > xs:redefine still exists in XSD 1.1, but it's marked as a deprecated > feature in XSD 1.1. > > XSD 1.1 defines a new schema component, xs:override (which is > conceptually similar to xs:redefine), which allows unrestricted > re-definition of schema components from overridden schemas > (xs:redefine required the overriding schema, to have components, which > should have derivation relationship to the overridden components). FYI to folks. xs:override hasn't been implemented yet so don't expect to see this in Xerces-J 2.10.0. It's future work. > > will it be possible to > > chain schemas, and (for example) to override a definition at a given > > point of the chain, and then to redefine that definition at a later > > point of that chain? > > I don't know for sure, a right answer to this. But my feeling is, that > a chained specification of overridden components should be possible. > > I suggest, please ask "XML Schema" language questions on "W3C XML > Schema" mailing list (ref, xmlschema-...@w3.org). > > > -- > Regards, > Mukul Gandhi > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: j-users-unsubscr...@xerces.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: j-users-h...@xerces.apache.org Michael Glavassevich XML Parser Development IBM Toronto Lab E-mail: mrgla...@ca.ibm.com E-mail: mrgla...@apache.org
