Hi Ben,
sorry to be a dolt, but what did you use for the schemaLocation paths?
Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Ryan" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 4:50 PM
Subject: Re: RDN/LTSN LOM application profile (fwd)
> Phil,
> I had a similar problem when creating a project for the schemas in
> XML Spy. The problem was that in some of the xsd files the import
statements
> did not have a schemaLocation attribute. Once I had added the attribute
> everything worked fine.
>
> The files that I have altered are:
>
> vocab/custom.xsd
> vocab/strict.xsd
> vocab/loose.xsd
> extend/custom.xsd
> common/vocabTypes.xsd
> common/dataTypes.xsd
> common/elementTypes.xsd
>
> Regards,
> Ben
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> Dr Ben Ryan
> HLSI Software Development Manager
> University of Huddersfield
> Tel: 01484 473587
> E-mail: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> -----------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phillip Beauvoir [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 25 March 2003 14:44
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: RDN/LTSN LOM application profile (fwd)
>
>
> I've been trying to get this IEEE Schema to work for some time now with
the
> Castor XML Java Library. No joy. All I get is:
>
> "Unable to resolve Schema corresponding to namespace
> http://ltsc.ieee.org/xsd/LOMv1p0/unique"
>
> And no further. I've emailed Erik Duval, but no answer yet.
>
> Phil Beauvoir
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andy Powell" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 2:20 PM
> Subject: Re: RDN/LTSN LOM application profile (fwd)
>
>
> > On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Andy Powell wrote:
> >
> > > http://www.rdn.ac.uk/publications/rdn-ltsn-ap/
> >
> > Someone told me where the current LOM XML schemas are
> >
> > http://www.cs.kuleuven.ac.be/~erikd/LOM/
> >
> > so I've added a LOM binding of the example. If nothing else, it is
> > interesting to compare the differences between the IMS and LOM bindings
> > for the fairly simple example I use in the document.
> >
> > As a result of using the LOM binding, I've updated the names of some of
> > the elements that I use elsewhere in the document (e.g.
> > 'otherplatformrequirements' -> 'otherPlatformRequirements').
> >
> > At this stage, I'm assuming that both the LOM binding and the qualified
DC
> > binding will become the recommended bindings for use within RDN/LTSN
> > partnerships. However, the current URL for the LOM XML schema work
> > (above) doesn't exactly inspire confidence about the stability of this
> > work? Would anyone care to comment on how stable the IEEE LOM bindings
> > are currently?
> >
> > Andy
> > --
> > Distributed Systems, UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK
> > http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell +44 1225 383933
> > Resource Discovery Network http://www.rdn.ac.uk/
> >
> >
>
>
|