Re: *which* alternative that matches nothing? (was Re: repetition)

On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 at 09:43, Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> wrote:
>
>  > Tks for the clarification Steven.
>  > <myView> KISS principle, have one option - from the given list ()
>  > seems clearest</myView>
>
> I completely agree with the KISS principle, but the use of () doesn't come
> from a design for representing empty, but from generality and consistency.
> There are a number of ways you could explicitly mark empty alternatives,
> but they emerge from generality, not from a use case.
>
> I did once consider allowing empty strings
>
>    empty: "".
>
> but it didn't add any functionality.

I'll reiterate, [] says empty most clearly for me?

regards



-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.

Received on Friday, 17 December 2021 09:46:34 UTC