Home. 
.

transparent

transparent

transparent

Altova Mailing List Archives


RE: Motivations for restricting the "all" group

From: "Michael Kay" <mike@--------.--->
To: "'Pete Cordell'" <petexmldev@---------.--->, "'Dag Hovland'"
Date: 5/28/2009 10:48:00 AM
> I think the feeling now is that there are other, non-state 
> machine ways to implement validation of constructs such as 
> xs:all with unrestricted cardinality and so the restrictions 
> are relaxed.

Yes, it's very easy to implement the validator with counters. The hardest
part in implementing the 1.1 spec is the rules for valid restrictions, for
example the fact that sequence(a, b, a?, b, a?) is a valid restriction of
all(a{1,5}, b{1,2}). And it's a little frustrating having to implement such
features when you know no-one is ever likely to write such a thing!

Regards,

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
http://twitter.com/michaelhkay 




transparent
Print
Mail
Like It
Disclaimer
.

These Archives are provided for informational purposes only and have been generated directly from the Altova mailing list archive system and are comprised of the lists set forth on www.altova.com/list/index.html. Therefore, Altova does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy, reliability, completeness, usefulness, non-infringement of intellectual property rights, or quality of any content on the Altova Mailing List Archive(s), regardless of who originates that content. You expressly understand and agree that you bear all risks associated with using or relying on that content. Altova will not be liable or responsible in any way for any content posted including, but not limited to, any errors or omissions in content, or for any losses or damage of any kind incurred as a result of the use of or reliance on any content. This disclaimer and limitation on liability is in addition to the disclaimers and limitations contained in the Website Terms of Use and elsewhere on the site.

.
.

transparent

transparent