>>>Rick Jelliffe said: > > But surely that is wrong, because > [attributes]=set(idAboutAttr?, bagIdAttr?, propertyAttr*) > then expands to > [attributes]=set(idAboutAttr?, bagIdAttr?, (typeAttr | propAttr)*) > which, allowing multiple typeAttr, is impossible? > > An XML element can only have one attribute with a single name*** > > Do you mean this: > [attributes]=set(idAboutAttr?, bagIdAttr?, typeAttr?, propAttr* ) True (and this is a bit better) but since propAttr also matches "rdf:type", how do I express that when rdf:type is seen, typeAttr should be accepted in priority to propAttr. Maybe I could define propAttr as all namespaced attributes except for those with namespace 'rdf-ns' and local name 'type'. Which is rather a mess. > Also, I think by "any" namespace you always mean "any except RDF". > And does this syntax exhaust the RDF namespace? No I don't mean except RDF. You can put RDF-namespaced properties anywhere that properties can be used - attributes or elements. <snip/> > *** Actually, one could think of getting around this using > <x xmlns:r1="namespace for rdf" xmlns:r2="namespace for rdf" > r1:type=" ..." r2:type="..." /> > but Namespace in XML explicitly disallows this in 5.3 > "Uniqueness of Attributes" > http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/ Yes, there would be different solutions if the standards upon which we are based were not the way they are. C'est la vie. DaveReceived on Thursday, 13 September 2001 09:01:23 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:28 GMT