Re: [relax-ng] Motivation for restrictions in section 7.2

["MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)" <EB2M-MRT@asahi-net.or.jp>]

> 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>