Hi, I downloaded 2.6.20 cvs tar.gz file, but compilation failed. The schematron.c has a line: #include <libxml/schematron.h>
But there's no schematron.h file at all. Thanks, Yong Chen -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 6:21 PM To: "Yong Chen (yongche)) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"@cisco.com Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [xml] What's wrong with this schema? Hi, > Von: "Yong Chen (yongche)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Datum: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:38:05 -0700 > Hi, > > I'm having a problem loading this simple schema, the xmlSchemaParse() > call fails: > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> > <xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"; > xmlns="http://myns"; > targetNamespace="http://myns"; > elementFormDefault="qualified" > attributeFormDefault="unqualified" > xml:lang="en"> > > <!-- > Type for <data> element > --> > <xs:complexType name="dataInlineType"> > <xs:complexContent> > <xs:extension base="xs:anyType"/> > </xs:complexContent> > </xs:complexType> > > </xs:schema> > > > The err is: > > ./x.xsd:12: element complexType: Schemas parser error : complex type > 'dataInlineType': The content type must be the simple base type. > > > Is that the "anyType" is not allowed here? Your schema is OK. This was a bug which had a bit of a rat-tail: 1. The "Derivation Valid (Extension)" (cos-ct-extends) constraint failed to recognize xs:anyType as a complex type 2. When this was fixed, clause 1.4.3 of the same constaint barked about the new type having no particle in the content type. In Libxml2 we didn't create the content type of xs:anyType, since it seemed not necessary and could be circumvented. So any _extended_ type could not inherit any particle from xs:anyType. Now it seems necessary to have a content type :-) IMHO the pure fact that it is allowed to _extend_ xs:anyType - which I never thought about, since it doesn't do anything - is a flaw in the spec. The only scenario where I can imagine this can be used is to create an alias for the xs:anyType, i.e. giving it an other name; but why would one do that? Nevertheless, thanks for this report! Reports of such side cases are highly appreciated! Keep them coming. Interesting would be, if any added model group to the new defined type would raise unique particle attribution (UPA) violations. Libxml2 does not check for UPA yet - although most of the functions are there already - so a comparison with other schema processors is recommended. Fixed in CVS: xmlschemastypes.c (rev. 1.99), xmlschemas.c (rev. 1.161). I added your test case to the regression tests. Regards, Kasimier _______________________________________________ xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/ [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml
