James Clark wrote:
> I don't see a good solution to 2. We could distinguish two kinds of name
> class: wildcards and non-wildcards.
>
> wildcard ::= <anyName/>
> | <nsName/>
> | <choice> wildcard wildcard </choice>
> | <difference> wildcard nameClass </difference>
>
> nonWildcard ::= <name>...</name>
> | <choice> nonWildcard nonWildcard </choice>
> | <difference> nonWildcard nameClass
> </difference>
>
> Then the nameClass for an attribute would be either a wildcard or a
> nonWildcard; the semantics of attribute when it is a wildcard would be to
> allow zero or more such attributes. Or perhaps we could use a separate
> <anyAttribute/> element in this case.
I do not think this is complication. Rather, this is simplification. (To
the contrary, I think the current syntax is over
generalization.)
I believe that this restriction makes coversion from TREX to RELAX significantly
easier. This means that it becomes possible to construct a tree automaton *in
advance*. Given a start tag, you can examine its attributes and then choose
<attribute ...>-free content models.
Cheers,
Makoto
Internet:
Nifty: VEQ00625
