XML I10-003 Exam - Topic 3 Question 71 Discussion

Actual exam question for XML's I10-003 exam

Question #: 71
Topic #: 3

Assume that [testmixsd] (referenced in a separate window) has been defined. Without rewriting this XML Schema Document ([testml-xsd]), create a new, separate XML Schema Document to partially change the schema definition replacing the phone element with a cellPhone element. As a result, the following [XML Document] will be valid against the new schema.

Which of the following correctly descnbes the new XML Schema Document?

Assume that the XMLDB or XML parser correctly processes the XML Schema schema Location attribute.

[XML Document]

John Smith

000-1111-2222

A<xs:schema xmlns:xs='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema'>
<xs:import schemaLocation='testml.xsd' />
<xs:element name='cellPhone' type='xs:string' />
</xs:schema>

B<xs:schema xmlns:xs='http://wvwv.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema'>
<xs:include schemaLocation='testmLxsd' />
<xs:element name='cellPhone' substitutionGroup='phone' type='xs:string' />
</xs:schema>

C<xs:schema xmlns:xs='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema'>
<xs:redefine schemaLocation-'testml.xsd'>
<xs:element name='cellPhone' base='phone' type='xs:string' />
</xs:redefine>
</xs:schema>

DThis type of definition cannot be created using XML Schema

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B

by Daniel at Jan 05, 2026, 05:16 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium I10-003 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Dorthy

Option A looks correct to me.

upvoted 0 times

...

Daniela

5 days ago

I bet the answer is B, it seems the most straightforward.

upvoted 0 times

...

Gilbert

26 days ago

D) is probably the easiest way to go, why overcomplicate it?

upvoted 0 times

...

Loren

1 month ago

Haha, "cellPhone" instead of "phone"? Sounds like a classic exam question.

upvoted 0 times

...

Selma

1 month ago

I'm not sure about this one, the question seems a bit tricky.

upvoted 0 times

...

Aleshia

1 month ago

Option C looks good to me.

upvoted 0 times

...

Cristal

2 months ago

I’m leaning towards option D because it seems tricky to change an element like that without rewriting the whole schema.

upvoted 0 times

...

Joana

2 months ago

I feel like "xs:redefine" might be the correct answer since it allows for modifications, but I’m not entirely confident about the syntax.

upvoted 0 times

...

Nathan

2 months ago

I remember that "xs:import" is used to bring in another schema, but I’m not clear if it’s the best choice for this question.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lashaunda

2 months ago

I think we practiced something similar where we had to replace elements in a schema. I’m not sure if "substitutionGroup" is the right approach here, though.

upvoted 0 times

...

Filiberto

2 months ago

I'm not sure if option D is correct. Surely there must be a way to modify the existing schema without completely rewriting it from scratch.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kelvin

2 months ago

Okay, I think I've got a strategy. I'll need to create a new schema document that references the original schema, and then redefine the 'phone' element to be 'cellPhone' instead.

upvoted 0 times

...

Glendora

3 months ago

Hmm, I'm a bit confused about the difference between using xs:import, xs:include, and xs:redefine. I'll need to review those XML Schema concepts before attempting this.

upvoted 0 times

...

Mattie

3 months ago

This looks like a tricky XML Schema question. I'll need to carefully read through the requirements and think through the different options.

upvoted 0 times

...