W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > April to June 2000

Re: XML Query Comments to XML Schema (3rd part)

From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 19:43:38 -0400
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF43DB2535.BBFCD7D7-ON852568F9.0082531D@lotus.com>
The original example was:

    ((c|d)+)

Phil's suggested syntax was:

 <option>...</option> to abbreviate 
   <repeat minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="unbounded">
      <choice>
        <element name="c"/>
        <element name="d"/>
      </choice>
   </repeat>

I suppose I should have suggested:

   <atLeastOneAnyOrder>   :-)

but in any case there is repetition, unless I have misunderstood the 
example.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------------







David Beech <dbeech@us.oracle.com>
Sent by: www-xml-schema-comments-request@w3.org
06/09/00 04:34 PM

 
        To:     www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
        cc:     w3c-xml-query-wg@w3.org, (bcc: Noah Mendelsohn/CAM/Lotus)
        Subject:        Re: XML Query Comments to XML Schema (3rd part)

Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com wrote:

> I suggest:
>
>         <oneOrMore> instead of <plus>
>         <zeroOrMore> for <star>
>
> I don't have any bright ideas for <option>.  <anyNumberAnyOrder> seems
> clumsy, if informative.

Is that what <option> is intended to mean?  I read it as
meaning <zeroOrOne>, which would be fine, or <optional>
might be slightly preferable to <option> since "option"
in natural language often has more the sense of "choice" -
"here are our options"!

  David
Received on Friday, 9 June 2000 19:51:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:12:47 GMT