W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > January 2002

Re: XML Schema list simple type

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 15:08:17 +0100 (CET)
To: Rich Salz <rsalz@zolera.com>
cc: Martin Gudgin <marting@develop.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0201181502270.32025-100000@mail.idoox.com>
Rich, I think BNF would be more understandable to the readers of 
the spec than a regexp, but I think we need a schema type, too. 
Even if we keep BNF or regexp.

Oh, BTW, the format is not '\*(\w+\d+)*' (what you probably
wanted to write) but it is '(\*|\d+)(\w+\d+)*' for the asterisk
needn't be there. And \d+ does not handle the restriction that
the number must not be zero so the regexp would grow even more.

(I hope I got my regexps right in the common (?) regexp dialect.)

I'd prefer that we have the Schema for formal definition and the 
BNF for simple definition. 8-)

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox)

On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Rich Salz wrote:

 > I think it would be easier to represent it as a string using a regular
 > expression , as in
 > 	'\*[\w*\d+]*'
 > Asterisk, followed by zero or more sequences of {whitespace, one-or-more
 > digits}"
 > 	/r$
Received on Friday, 18 January 2002 09:08:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:18 UTC