[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: Minutes for RELAX NG TC 2001-06-14
> clarification. Murata-san was using the term in light of regular tree > languages that can generate acceptable sentences that can then generate > trees. [Clarify?] Here is my take: A regular expression R (like "a+,b") is said to "generate a language" because R defines a set of strings that are accepted by R. "Language" means "set" here. So the language generated by "a+,b" is {"ab","aab","aaab", ... } Here, We'd like to extend this to a RELAX NG pattern. A RELAX NG pattern P is said to "generate a language" because P defines a set of trees that are accepted by P. So the language generated by <element name="foo"> <data type="integer"/> </element> is { <foo>0</foo>, <foo>1</foo>, ... } Now consider the following pattern: <element name="foo"> <attribute name="a"/> <attribute name="a"/> </element> What is the language generated by the above pattern? Is it {<foo a="..." a="..."/>}? The only reason we want to remove <foo a="..." a="..."/> from the above set is, it is no longer XML. So look at this in this way: the pattern can "generate" something that is no longer XML. Murata-san was thinking about this and wanted to add restrictions so that no legal RELAX NG pattern generates "non-XML". James then argued that this objective is actually already accomplished by the current inference rules. I said that is true but that is only because the current inference rule is too smart. -- Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI +1 650 786 0721 Sun Microsystems kohsuke.kawaguchi@sun.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC