The Question one(essay

Namespace Normality essentially is a recommendation for how "nice" XML

documents should look like (with respect to namespace declaration
placement). Each sort of misleading case is bad for a certain reason (typically,
in how it might mislead a reader concerning what the actual label of some
node is). A normal document has all the declarations in one place and each
declaration is uniquely informative.
In 200-300 words, explain whether enforcing normality is best practice for
documents which use the "Contained" namespace modelling pattern and why.
Please note that there is a tension between the benefits of namespace
normality and the namespace declaration pattern suggested by the Contained
namespace pattern. Neglecting that tension is unlikely to be successful.
Also note: It is perfectly possible to have a document using the Contained
namespace pattern, while being in namespace normal form. Namespace
normal form is only about the namespace declarations. The Contained
namespace pattern says nothing about declarations.

The Question two

Suppose we have an XML Format that consists of:

1. A root element, a, which has no attributes and must contain

one or more b elements.
2. An element b, which is empty and may optionally have an
attribute named c.
3. An attribute named c, which has no specific constraints on
its content.

Write two distinct DTDs that recognise exactly this set of

documents, but generate distinct PSVIs. In particular, the
serialisation of the distinct PSVIs should (in at least one
case) result in distinct documents.
Now, imagine the same format except that no attributes are
allowed. For this case, write two distinct XSDs such that
they generate distinct PSVIs. The serialisation of the PSVIs
should always be the same.

You should submit a zipped directory named M4 containing

4 files, dtd1.dtd, dtd2.dtd, wxs1.xsd, wxs2.xsd.
NOTE: There are no tools, to our knowledge, that just
produce or show you a PSVI. You can inspect a PSVI by
using queries in strategic ways.