> I think it's good that users cannot right a name-class equal to notAllowed.
> There's never any need to do so. You only need this with patterns because
> of <define>, but you cannot define name classes.
That is true. But it is internally useful.
> Allowing a nameClass equivalent to notAllowed would also complicated
> transformation rules, because you need to transform
>
> <attribute>
> <notAllowed/>
> p
> </attribute>
>
> into
>
> <notAllowed/>
That is not much of a complication, isn't it. And <notAllowed/> at the
same time makes several inference rules easier.
By using <notAllowed/>, one can always assume that <nsName> and
<anyName> have an <except> in it. So the inference rule (anyName-1) and
(nsName-1) become unnecessary.
regards,
--
Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI +1 650 786 0721
Sun Microsystems
