|
| Re: mystery schema error with redefines [message #206532 is a reply to message #206515] |
Wed, 09 January 2008 18:08  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: merks.ca.ibm.com
Rob,
The format of the error message indicates to me that this is an error
produced by Xerces so it's unlikely that someone at Eclipse will be able
to fix it. Redefinition is notoriously ill defined so I would not
recommend using it. Avoid it like you would a bad disease. If you do
use it, you'd better be really sure that all files include or import the
redefining schema and that no other file imports or includes the schema
being redefined except the redefining schema; otherwise your downstream
schemas will see the original version and the redefined version, which
sounds like is the case here...
Rob Iverson wrote:
> I found another message about this problem:
>
> http://dev.eclipse.org/newslists/news.eclipse.webtools/msg06 963.html
>
> but can't seem to reply to it. Anyway I changed my schemas slightly
> and now get the same error that poster did:
>
> Referenced file contains errors (file:/C:/...). For more information,
> right click on the message and select "Show Details..."
>
> When the "Show Details..." option is there (it is not always), it
> gives a large list of errors like this:
>
> sch-props-correct.2: A schema cannot contain two global components
> with the same name; this schema contains two occurrences of ',T_XXX'.
>
> I definitely haven't defined anything twice; since the error only
> surfaces when I validate a document against a schema that redefines
> one type from schema X and includes schema Y (which in turn includes
> schema X), I think that is the "problem".
>
> Also, the one type that I've tried to redefine is listed in the errors
> as something mangled, like ',T_XXX_fn3dktizrknc9pi'.
>
> However, I don't know how to avoid the errors. I'm happy to submit a
> bug if nobody thinks there has been one (I haven't been able to find
> one). I have not had any success reproducing the error with a smaller
> set of schemas.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Rob
>
>
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02684 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
