Schematron abstract pattern Variable has not been declared (or its declaration is not in scope)

[corymosiman12]

Trying to create an abstract pattern in a schematron doc and getting the posted error. Pattern is below.

Code: Select all

  <pattern abstract="true" id="floorAreasHaveTypeAndValue">
    <rule context="$parentElement">
      <assert test="auc:FloorArea/auc:FloorAreaType and auc:FloorArea/auc:FloorAreaValue">
        auc:FloorArea elements must specify both a auc:FloorAreaType and auc:FloorAreaValue
      </assert>
    </rule>
  </pattern>

XML Editor 21.1, build 2019071807
macOS 10.14.6

[Radu]

Hi,

Maybe you can post a complete Schematron file for which the error message is received.
For example in Oxygen 21.1 if I open and validate this Schematron file it is reported as valid:

Code: Select all

<schema xmlns="http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron" queryBinding="xslt2"
    xmlns:sqf="http://www.schematron-quickfix.com/validator/process">
    <pattern abstract="true" id="floorAreasHaveTypeAndValue">
        <rule context="$parentElement">
            <assert test="auc:FloorArea/auc:FloorAreaType and auc:FloorArea/auc:FloorAreaValue">
                auc:FloorArea elements must specify both a auc:FloorAreaType and auc:FloorAreaValue
            </assert>
        </rule>
    </pattern>
</schema>

Regards,
Radu

[corymosiman12]

Strangely enough, when I moved the function to a different file than the one in which it was used, it worked...is this expected behavior? Does an abstract function need to be defined in a file external to the file in which it is instantiated?

[Radu]

Hi,

As you did not post complete samples with which the original problem could be reproduced I cannot precisely tell you what was wrong.
Abstract patterns can stay either in the same Schematron file or in other Schematron files included directly or indirectly by the current schematron file.

Regards,
Radu

[corymosiman12]

That's ok. Sorry, I am now no longer able to reproduce, else I would post the actual files...thanks for your response though!