OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

relax-ng message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: Re: Interleave (was Re: [relax-ng] RELAX NG telcon 25 October 2001)

Maybe we should consider making


a prohibited path.  We already make oneOrMore//interleave//attribute 
prohibited, so we would be simply generalizing that: it would simplify the 
spec rather than complicate it.  I can't think of any use cases where 
oneOrMore//interleave is useful.

The other two are trickier.  If the third one was changed to:

(a* & (b, c)) | ((a, b) & c*)

would it still be hard? If so, I don't see any solution, since we need to 

  (a, b) & c*

and we need closure.

--On 25 October 2001 17:52 +0900 MURATA Makoto <EB2M-MRT@asahi-net.or.jp> 

> James Clark wrote:
>> 2. Issue 40. Restriction on interleave.  Any further news from
>> Hosoya-san? Should we allow <interleave> inside <list>?
> Hosoya-san reported that the following patterns are hard although
> they satisfy the restrictions in our draft.
> 	a, (a & b), b
> 	(a & b)*
> 	(a & (b, c)) | ((a, b) & c)
> He is leaning towards some global restrictions, but does not have any
> concrete ideas.
> It appears to be difficult to find something better than our (arguably
> insufficient) restrictions in the near future.
> Cheers,
> Makoto
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Powered by eList eXpress LLC