I loaded your XSD. Xray liked it.
I loaded your sample message. Xray said it was not valid according to
your XSD. I have attached the screen shot. Offending location was line
the end of line 90 or beginning of line 91 ( between the 2 lines
exerpted below):
<namespacedXMLcontent
xmlns:cap1.0="http://www.incident.com/cap/1.0">
<cap1.0:alert
xmlns="http://www.incident.com/cap/1.0">
I have a freeware validator, so it might be my validator, but then so do
a lot of other folks.
R/s
Gary A. Ham
Senior Research Scientist
Battelle Memorial Institute
540-288-5611 (office)
703-869-6241 (cell)
"You would be surprised what you can accomplish when you do not care who
gets the credit." - Harry S. Truman
-----Original Message-----
From: Ellis, David [mailto:]
Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2005 5:31 PM
To: Michelle Raymond;
Cc: Ellis, David
Subject: RE: [emergency] update for EDXL DE xsd and Sample xml
EMTC
I have added to my Radiation Example and also done some addition work on
the schema. I would appreciate everyone with an XML validation tool to
examine them both in detail. I created them with my Microsoft Visual
Studio 2005 Beta 2 software. I used it because the production Visual
Studio 2003 will not allow a <choice> in a <sequence> of elements. When
I used the <group> element it validated but was obviously an artifact of
the older Microsoft software. I am also no expert of XML schema and
would still like to provide flexibility in the EDXLDistribution schema
for include namespaces for validating <ContentObject> XML and wrapping
the contents of <namespacedXMLcontent> with encryption and signature
capability.
Please review this and let me know what your tools determine.
David E. Ellis
Information Management Architect
(505) 844-6697
-----Original Message-----
From: Michelle Raymond [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 11:34 PM
To: Emergency_Mgt_TC TC
Subject: [emergency] EDXL DE xsd and Sample xml and latest draft
EMTC,
I'm a bit delayed on sending the full draft due to schema validation
issues. I think they are resolved in the files sent.
Dave did a great job putting the schema together. I still had issues
with the <group> element followed by a <choice> in three validation
tools. By removing the <group> as a wrapper, it 'seems' to have
resolved the issue. I am no expert on xml schema 'model groups',
'partitions' or the like. We're likely to get (hopefully constructive)
comments on the schema format during review.
In the Specification Draft, Section 3.2: Data Dictionary, Appendix A:
Examples and Appendix B: Schema still need replacing. I'll do that
after a sleep break.
Best Regards,
Michelle
