[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [relax-ng] Motivation for restrictions in section 7.2
> I don't see where there is any confusion in the interpretation of the > examples you gave if we stick to these definitions. It appears that I have misunderstood this issue! I can think of two reasons. First, as a principle, RELAX NG prohibits those patterns which cannot be satisfied by any documents. This principle is proposed by my following mail: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/relax-ng/200106/msg00127.html This principle prohibits <group><data .../><data .../></group>, but does not prohibit<group><data .../><element .../></group>. Second, I think that users will be confused if we allow consecutive <data>. For example, people would expect that <foo>1 2</foo> matches element foo {xsd:short, xsd:short}. There is no point in allowing such meaningless patterns. > I think it's fundamentally wrong for a particular element to > simultaneously have as children typed content (ie something that matches > <data>) and elements, eg James also wrote: > > <foo>123<bar/></foo> > > where 123 matches <data type="int"/> rather than <text/>. This is the same > reason why I want a stronger restriction than you on mixing elements and > data. http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/relax-ng/200106/msg00139.html -- MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <EB2M-MRT@asahi-net.or.jp>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC