Hello, Adrian: On 12/22/2015 08:41 AM, Oxygen XML Editor Support (Adrian Buza) wrote:
When relying on the namespace instead of an explicit schema association (xsi:schemaLocation), Oxygen only associates one schema for the root element namespace of the XML instance. Any other namespaces from the XML instance are ignored.
I have since confirmed this. Were it feasible, a promiscuous, sub-root, implicit namespace to schema mapping would be beneficial. That would provide a comprehensive implicit association based solely on namespace (of course requiring appropriate XML Catalog mappings to be supplied).
Why do you consider using xsi:schemaLocation is a problem? As long as you have an XML catalog that resolves the schema location, it doesn't really matter what location is being used.
I was unsure of this, but will consider it (particularly for unlinked sub-schemas, such as in OVAL). Now that you have pointed that out, I will use it where necessary (I have found yet another example here <http://scap.nist.gov/schema/scap/1.2/scap-source-data-stream_1.2.xsd>, which falls prey to the same disjointed nature of the OVAL schemata). I'd prefer to rely solely on namespace whenever possible. I continue to find a non-trivial amount of inferior xsi:schemaLocation usage in many documents from various sources. These typically result in failed validations due to non-existent relative references, failed absolute references to external sources, and the like.
Instead of using a canonical location, you could use the actual namespace as the schema location in xsi:schemaLocation and it would work in Oxygen. e.g. <oval_definitions xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:schemaLocation="http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-definitions-5 http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-definitions-5 http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-definitions-5#independent http://oval.mitre.org/XMLSchema/oval-definitions-5#independent" ...
The alternative is to modify the main XML schema (or create another main XML schema) to import all namespaces that are used in the XML instance.
I have tried the latter, which worked well, and will likely additionally adopt the former method. Thanks much for the explanations. Regards, Gary