This disallows:
<zeroOrMore>
<choice>
<element>
<anyName/>
</element>
<attribute>
<anyName/>
</attribute>
</choice>
</zeroOrMore>
which is useful and harmless since equivalent to:
<group>
<zeroOrMore>
<element>
<anyName/>
</element>
</zeroOrMore>
<zeroOrMore>
<attribute>
<anyName/>
</attribute>
</choice>
</zeroOrMore>
I would propose instead the following restriction (also in terms of the
normalized form):
If a <oneOrMore> element has an <attribute> descendant, it must not have a
<group> or <interleave> descendant.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Murata Makoto" <>
To: "TREX Discussion List" <>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 9:41 PM
Subject: Issue: shall we restrict subordinates of <oneOrMore>
> I believe that we have to restrict <oneOrMore> patterns. If we
> allow an <oneOrMore> element to contain both <attribute> and <ref>,
> I do not think that we can test the equivalence and subset relationship
> of patterns [1]. Furthemore, descriptive power of such patterns is beyond
> the class of regular languages, and (in my opinion) excessive.
>
> I would propose restrictions as below:
>
> After normalization by JamesC [2] , the subordinate of a <oneOrMore>
element
> takes one of the three forms as below:
>
> 1) a pattern not containing <attribute> directly or indirectly.
>
> 2) an <attribute> element.
>
> 3) a <choice> element containing <attribute> elements or
> <choice> elements of the form 3) only.
>
> [1] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/trex/200105/msg00015.html
>
> [2] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/trex/200104/msg00046.html
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Makoto
>
>
>
