"Michael Kay" <mhk@m...> writes:

> Questions about xs:include where the including schema document has a
> targetNamespace and the included document does not:
>
> In 4.2.1, Schema Representation Constraint: Inclusion Constraints and
> Semantics, rune 3.2.1, [Part 1, PER of 2004-03-18] there is apparently =
a
> typo: "whose code was qualified" should presumably be "whose form was
> qualified".

Yes.

> The implication is that the absent namespace should only be replaced by=
 the
> target namespace in places where the target namespace would have been u=
sed.
> This would imply that <xs:element ref="A"/> (assuming there is no def=
ault
> namespace) is still to be interpreted as a reference to A in the
> absent-namespace, not a reference to A in the (new) target namespace

Need more information to clarify.  There are three possibilities:

 1) The <xs:element ref="A"/> and the declaration of A are in the
    <include>d schema document.  In that case, the reference has been
    resolved during the construction of "the =B7schema components=B7 of
    I", and clause 3.2.1 will change the TNS of A, a top-level
    component, to the <includ>ing TNS.

 2) The <xs:element ref="A"/> is in the <include>d schema document,
    but there is no declaration for A therein.  In this case the
    paragraph below the constraint comes in to play:

    "=B7Absent=B7 target =B7namespace name=B7s of such as-yet unresolved
     reference =B7QName=B7s in <include>d components must also be convert=
ed
     if clause 3.2 is satisfied."

 3) The <xs:element ref="A"/> is in the <includ>ing document.  No
    conversion is performed, and the reference stands or falls
    depending on whether there is an <xs:import/>.

> and that ##local in a wildcard still refers to the absent namespace,
> not the (new) target namespace. Correct? (And if so, is this
> actually usable?)

No, such wildcards are converted. 3.2.2 says

    "[replace =B7absent=B7 namespace with TNS in] [t]he {namespace
     constraint} of a wildcard, whether negated or not;"

> Is it true that the effect of including a schema document with no targe=
t
> namespace into a schema document with target namespace T is equivalent =
to
> modifying the included document so that it says targetNamespace="T" b=
efore
> processing it?

No.  That would leave all internal references undischarged.  It is
equivalent to constructing a schema for the included document, then
replacing =B7absent=B7 with the relevant TNS everywhere in the components
thereof called for in 3.2.1 and 3.2.2.

Note it is because of chameleon include that a list of schema
documents is _not_ sufficient to determine a schema -- you need a
labelled directed graph, with the labels being the TNS.

ht
-- 
 Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinbur=
gh
                     Half-time member of W3C Team
    2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@i...
                   URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged =
spam]

From mhk@m... Tue Oct 05 10:33:05 2004
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41])
	by frink.w3.org with esmtp (E