[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: Normal form
> We can then describe the restriction on attributes as follows. It is an > error if the TREX pattern after transformation into normal form has an > "attribute" element with a descendant "ref" or "attribute" element. I don't see any reason to mandate this constraint check. I'd rather want to see this check done by "lint" like program. Yes, attribute pattern containing attributes is a "broken" pattern, but there are much more broken patterns. And we can't and shouldn't try to detect all of them. <define name="xxx" combine="choice"> ... </define> For example, under the current specification, the above example is considered OK even if no pattern is defined as "xxx". I guess this feature is intentional to make XHTML modularization happy, but it is probably not a good feature for humans, who tend to make typos. -- Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI +1 650 786 0721 Sun Microsystems kohsuke.kawaguchi@eng.sun.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC