Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI wrote:
> I think you should send it to TREX ML, Murata-san.
Since you didn't, I didn't. Your message was sent to me only.
> I know that every automaton can be written back into regular expression
> *theoretically*. But there are just so much sugar in XML Schema that
> makes this transformation impractical.
I don't understand. I was not talking about XML Schema.
>And if the resulting regexp has
> to be somewhat legible otherwise the schema itself becomes meaningless,
> doesn't it.
Yes. But I was not talking about convering the result of regexps back
to schemas in my first mail.
> > If we consider validation only, there are no problems.
> >
> > If we consider operations to schema, we already have many problems. Why
> > not another?
>
> I think this one is an unnecessary complication because I don't think we
> need regexp to restrict tag names.
My original post was a request for criteria. Certainly, some regular exprssions
for tag names are useful. E.g.,"any attribute names up to 10 characters"
and "any attribute names in US-ascii". Do they hit 80%? Doubtful. But we have
to have better understading of the requirement.
Cheers,
Makoto
