"Hirtle, David" <David.Hirtle@n...> writes:

> When I sent my original message to the list, the file b.xsd only used one
> <redefine>:
>
> 	<xs:redefine schemaLocation="a.xsd">
> 		<!-- add y to body -->
> 		<xs:group name="body.content">
> 			<xs:choice>
> 				<xs:group ref="body.content"/>
> 				<xs:element ref="y"/>				
> 			</xs:choice>
> 		</xs:group>	
>
> 		<!-- remove x from body by restriction --> 	
> 		<xs:group name="body.content">
> 			<xs:choice>
> 				<xs:element ref="y"/>
> 			</xs:choice>
> 		</xs:group>
> 	</xs:redefine>
>
> I created new files f.xsd, g.xsd (at http://www.ruleml.org/0.89/xsd) for this
> original example.  Note that with this one <redefine>, XSV crashes:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/03/webdata/xsv?docAddrs=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ruleml.org%2F0.89%2Fexa%2Ffg.ruleml&style=xsl#

Hmph!  Infinite loop :-( 

>> The 'correct' way to do this is with _three_ files.
>
> Unfortunately XSV doesn't seem to like the three file way either:

None-the-less I think it's the only correct way.

Is redefining things really the logically correct way to think about
the underlying requirement?

ht
-- 
 Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                     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 cmsmcq@a... Mon Apr 04 19:21:25 2005
Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.5