Re: unambiguity constraint

James Clark wrote:

> By type, do you mean to include complex types as well as simple types?

Yes.

> Intuitively, the constraint my algorithm imposes is that for any text node
> you must be able to tell whether it is a key or keyref and what kind of key
> or keyref it is just by considering the names of the ancestors of the text
> node (including attribute as an ancestor).
> 
> My algorithm doesn't care about complex types.  You can be as ambiguous as
> you like as far as complex types are concerned.  For example, the following
> is fine:

I think I now understand your algorithm.  Cool!

Cheers,

Makoto