I don't know if it would be worth filing a bug report with Altova or
contacting Altova support. Xerces seems to have no problem with this. By
our reading of w3c's XML Schema what we are doing is not an error.
Xerces from Apache, arguably the most authoritative implementation of
W3C Schmea, appears to agree with us. XMLSpy does not seem to be
compatible with the rest of the XML world. If enough people complain
maybe Altova will reevaluate their interpretation of W3C schema.
Of course, we could have METS point to MODS' xlink.xsd. At the moment,
the actual contents of xlink.xsd are the same. This idea did not
have consensus last time it was discussed on the list.
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 05:34:29PM -0800, Marsha Maguire wrote:
> Thank you so much, Brian. Whew, that's a relief -- of sorts. We've already
> paid for XMLSpy and can't retool at this early stage in the project, but I
> was able FINALLY to validate my METS document (which also uses MODS and
> MIX) by saving the MODS schema to my PC and pointing there in my namespace
> and schemaLocation references. In my local copy of the MODS schema, I
> deleted all references to xlink: as an attribute because XMLSpy said it was
> repetitive to have xlink referenced in two different schemas (from the same
> namespace, as you point out). Hmmm, probably all I needed to do was put one
> of the schemas on my local machine and not make changes in the schema. I'll
> try that next, but for those of us who are trying to learn and implement
> METS, and who have committed to XMLSpy already, is any long-term solution
> on the horizon?
> Many thanks!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Tingle" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 5:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [METS] Basic question about XLink in METS and MODS
> >We belive that XMLSpy is in error. Its getting confused because
> >two different schemaLocaions are being used for the same namespace.
> >The XMLSpy developers, as I understand it, insist their intrepreation
> >of the spec is correct and that the instances are in error.
> >Last time I tried, Xerces validates documents like this. Xerces
> >is the defalut validating parser for the oXygen XML editor, which
> >is much nicer than the last version of XMLSpy I used.
> >-- Brian
> >On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 04:54:02PM -0800, Marsha Maguire wrote:
> >>Hi, all,
> >>This is a *very* basic question (a few of us are working on a METS pilot
> >>project and are sort of learning as we go), but has anyone experienced
> >>XMLSpy validation problems when MODS is used to provide descriptive
> >>metadata in a METS document? At the top of my METS document, I refer to
> >>namespaces for METS and MODS, along with some other namespaces, and I add
> >>the schema location info for METS and MODS:
> >><mets:mets xmlns:mets="http://www.loc.gov/METS/"
> >>http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/mets.xsd http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3
> >>Have I done anything illegal here? I'm hand encoding a test record, and
> >>XMLSpy OKs it as well formed, but it doesn't validate. Instead, XMLSpy
> >>opens mods-3-0.xsd and, with the cursor on line 5, which is the
> >>statement of the W3 namespace for XLink and the schema location statement
> >>for the xlink.xsd schema at the LC MODS site, gives the error message:
> >>This file is not valid: Unable to load schema with target namespace
> >>'http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink' from
> >>Does the schema location need to refer to the same URI the one stated in
> >>the namespace for XLink? I'm sure there's no problem with the MODS
> >>so I must be missing something or stating something incorrectly (and I'll
> >>be mortified when someone tells me how basic the error I made is).
> >>Many thanks and have a good weekend.
> >>Marsha Maguire
> >>Manuscripts and Special Collections Cataloging Librarian
> >>University of Washington Libraries
> >>P.O. Box 352900
> >>Seattle, WA 98195-2900
> >>(206) 543-8407 fax: (206) 685-8782
> >>[log in to unmask]