W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > October 2005

max occurs

From: Alessandro Triglia <sandro@mclink.it>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 14:43:51 +0200 (CEST)
To: sandygao@ca.ibm.com, xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Message-Id: <1.3.200510141443.80930@mclink.it>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandy Gao [mailto:sandygao@ca.ibm.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 16:35
> To: Alessandro Triglia
> Cc: 'ML-xml-schema-dev'
> Subject: RE: min occurs
> 
> 
> 
> Hi. Trying to reply to both your messages in the thread. 
> 
> > I would like to reply to Sandy that ...
> 
> As you can probably tell, I was just moving issues around 
> instead of raising them. So I'd rather you say "reply to bug 
> 2222". :-) 
> 
> > Why wasn't the {max occur} property of particles just 
> specified as a *positive* integer?  Am I missing something obvious? 
> 
> Did you mean "Either a positive integer or unbounded"? (We do 
> need the "unbounded" value.) 


Yes.


> Then I agree: "positive" makes 
> more sense than "non-negative" because we never allow 0. And 
> we can kill that 2.2 clause about {max occurs} must >= 1. 


Exactly.


> 
> It's up to you to either add your comments to bug 2222 or 
> open a new one [1] if you think they are sufficiently different. 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/enter_bug.cgi?product=XML%20Schema 
> 
> > The second issue above (beginning with "I also noticed the 
> following...") is
> > not reported in Sandy's bug report.
> 
> You are right. I vaguely remember seeing this comment before, 
> but couldn't find it anywhere. Feel free to open a new bug. 


Thank you,

Alessandro


> 
> Thanks,
> Sandy Gao
> XML Parser Development, IBM Canada
> (1-905) 413-3255
> sandygao@ca.ibm.com
> 
Received on Friday, 14 October 2005 12:44:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:14:51 GMT