[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: Reopening Issue 26: regularityConstraint
Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI wrote: > The current restriction is already restrictive enough to make RELAX NG a > tree regular language. Yes, it is. On the other hand, I now think the restriction is ugly. It does not allow what could be allowed. E.g., ((@*)?, (@*)?)*. This stems from the fact that <oneOrMore> for repeating elements and <oneOrMore> for repeating elements play non-orthgonal roles and are neverthless "unified". > So what is the advantage of your proposal? Is it just the simpler BNF? A Simpler BNF means that the language becomes easier to learn. Cheers, Makoto
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC