[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: Issue: are <optional>, <oneOrMore>, <zeroOrMore> verbose?
"Terseness is of minimal importance." XML is verbose. Element heavy RELAX NG is verbose. I hope our syntax is clear and immediate if verbose. On principle, I prefer clear and verbose over terse and arcane. To me this syntax is fine and dandy: <optional> <attribute ..></attribute> <optional> I wish for: <define name="commonAttributes"> <optional> <attribute ..></attribute> <attribute ..></attribute> <attribute ..></attribute> <attribute ..></attribute> <attribute ..></attribute> ... <optional> </define> based on the same principle, but I am ignorant of any processing entanglements this might introduce. Mike -----Original Message----- From: Murata Makoto [mailto:mura034@attglobal.net] Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 12:30 AM To: relax-ng@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Issue: are <optional>, <oneOrMore>, <zeroOrMore> verbose? Currently, to declare optional attributes, we write <optional> <attribute ..> </attribute> <optional> To declare a collection of many optional attributes, we write <define name="commonAttributes"> <optional> <attribute ..> </attribute> <optional> <optional> <attribute ..> </attribute> <optional> ... <optional> <attribute ..> </attribute> <optional> </define> Isn't this verbose? Quite a few people in the XML Schema WG think that elements for */+/? are too verbose and have chosen "maxOccurs"" and minOccurs". RELAX Core has chosen "occurs". Cheers, Makoto ------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word "unsubscribe" in the body to: relax-ng-request@lists.oasis-open.org
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC