Altova Mailing List Archives>Archive Index >xmlschema-dev Archive Home >Recent entries >Thread Prev - Re: optional, but at least one required [Thread Next] RE: optional, but at least one requiredTo: "'Henry S. Thompson'" <ht@---.--.--.-->, <noah_mendelsohn@--.---.---> Date: 10/18/2007 11:40:00 AM > c) It makes the worst-case time complexity of subsumption checking > between two content models linear (as opposed to exponential). Which makes me wonder just how important this very general capability to restrict content models is. Particularly as the price you pay is to spell out the parts of the model that you want to keep in the subtype, rather than only saying which parts you want to drop, which makes it a maintenance nightmare. Sometimes I think that all you really need in practice is the ability to modify individual element particles either (a) to prohibit them from appearing at all, or (b) to restrict the type of their own content. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/ From thorsten.moeller@i... Sat Oct 20 16:47:50 2007 Receiv | ||||||
| Company | Legal | Press | Partners | Careers | Sitemap | Contact Us | Altova Blog | Mobile | Full Site | |||
|
