This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 2871 - RQ-34 Add inline schemas (inline-schema)
Summary: RQ-34 Add inline schemas (inline-schema)
Status: ASSIGNED
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Primer: XSD Part 0 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: Other All
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard: important, work
Keywords: needsDrafting
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-02-11 02:23 UTC by C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Modified: 2007-04-02 14:43 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2006-02-11 02:23:51 UTC
Specify a manner in which schema documents can be included in-line in
instances.

See (member-only link)
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/xmlschema-current/issues.html#inlineSchemaInfo
(http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/xmlschema-current/issues.html#inlineSchemaInfo)
: Issue 42.

Input from Straw Poll O-11

NOTE 2002-08-02: there was some support at our face to face meeting
for promoting this to desideratum, and some for removing it, and some
for handling it as a clarification with erratum for XML Schema 1.0
Second Edition; there was most support for leaving it as an
opportunistic desideratum.  In the absence of consensus to move it, we
left it alone.  There was speculation that if we get good text for
this, the WG might be willing to put it into 2E anyway.

This item was resolved in the meeting of 2004-03-18
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2004Mar/0060.html),
with the observation that it is already possible to use inline schemas
and that a task force is working on the area.

The WG eventually concluded that this could usefully be handled in a 
separate note.  A draft has been prepared but not yet approved.

Ashok Malhotra's draft of July 2003:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-wg/2005Mar/att-0022/InlineSchemas.html

Henry Thompson's revision of the barename example:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2005May/att-0048/selfRef.xml

(Both are member-only links.)
Comment 1 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2007-04-02 14:43:56 UTC
The Working Group has discussed this at some length in the past, and
(as reflected in the description) concluded that the right way to deal
with the problem is to describe the options in a separate Note.  Putting
s discussion into the primer is another possibility.  

Rather than take the time to create a different component to enable us
to track this as a requirement for a separate note, I'm going to change
it from Structures to Primer.  (This is not to be interpreted as a 
final decision that the topic must be dealt with in the primer.)