• From: Francis Norton <francis@r...>
• To: "Fuchs, Matthew" <matthew.fuchs@c...>
• Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:34:25 +0100

"Fuchs, Matthew" wrote:
> 
>> 
> But if elementFormDefault were in the instance, I wouldn't need to rewrite a
> schema I don't have write access to.
> 
XML Schema validation is designed round the principle that the message
*reader* chooses the schema to validate against - that's why the spec
has language like 

"The xsi:schemaLocation and xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation attributes can
be used in a document to provide hints as to the physical location of
schema documents which may be used for ·assessment·."

So you are absolutely free to validate a transformed message against a
transformed local copy of the schema - and thanks for providing such a
good use case for a possibly counter-intuitive design feature.

Francis.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
    • From: Francis Norton <francis@r...>

• References:
  • RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
    • From: "Fuchs, Matthew" <matthew.fuchs@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: "Uh, what do I need this for" (was RE: XML.COM: How I Learne d toLove daBomb)
• Next by Date: Re: Namespaces, W3C XML Schema (was Re: ANN: SAX Filters forNamespaceProcessing)
• Previous by thread: RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
• Next by thread: Re: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread