Validating a xsd schema file

Hi, I would like to know if it's possible (and how) to use Xerces to perform Schema validation in the same manner as SQC (Schema Quality Checker from IBM). That is, to validate the correctness of the schema file itself without looking at any instances of it. Regards, Simon --

Re: Validating a xsd schema file

i'm not sure how SQC works but XMLSchema is XML and thus it can be validated as any other xml file. i believe (i'm a little rusty) that XMLSchemas are instances of XMLSchema.xsd and that uses XMLSchema.dtd that assumes you want to validate it for correctness according to XMLSchema.xsd and XMLSche

RE: grammar pool population

Hi Andy, Each SchemaGrammar is a container for all the schema components of a given target namespace. Includes have no representation in the model (though you can query [1] the grammar for the list of document URIs which contributed to it). All of the schema components constructed from the include

Re: Validating a xsd schema file

Validating your schema against the schema for schemas (XMLSchema.xsd) isn't sufficient for determining whether your schema is valid. There are many constraints which cannot be expressed in the language, for example the complex rules for particle derivation [1] which apply to complex type restrictio

Re: [Request] Xerces-J: XML Schema 1.1 feature feedback

Hello Michael, Thank you for the clarification. Does this mean that the JAXP specification needs to be cognizant of this feature ? Thank you, -Prashant On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 23:19 -0500, Michael Glavassevich wrote: > Probably worth pointing out that in order to be immediately useful to > users

Re: [Request] Xerces-J: XML Schema 1.1 feature feedback

Probably worth pointing out that in order to be immediately useful to users, the conditional inclusion [1] feature would need to be supported in XML Schema 1.0 processors as well. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-xmlschema11-1-20070830/#cip Michael Glavassevich XML Parser Development IBM Toronto

RE: grammar pool population

Thank you for your response. Would it be possible to remove the grammar parts associated with an included schema? This would probably require an intelligent grammarpool implementation that partitions definitions in the grammar for partial schemas defined within the same Grammar by targetNamespace.