- From: Arjun Ray <aray@nmds.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 18:20:26 -0400
- To: W3C SGML Working Group <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org>
At 01:23 PM 10/17/96 CDT, Michael Sperberg-McQueen wrote: > >C.10 Should XML allow nondeterministic content models (11.2.4.3)? Yes. (I assume that "determinism" -- or the complementary "ambiguity" -- here pertains to the sense clarified in Anne Bruggemann-Klein's work: that the Glushkov NFA is also a DFA.) Strictly speaking, this is an issue of validation, not parsing, i.e. the software involved need only be a recognizer, not necessarily a parser. (A similar comment applies to "syntax directed translation" via attribute or transduction grammars, where the need to preserve the semantic content -- or intent -- can introduce tradeoffs in algorithms between scope and efficiency.) AFAIK, most recognition algorithms actually exploit nondeterminism in the sense that they work as NFAs rather than DFAs (sometimes even constructing states and transitions on the fly), because the problem is to validate an instance as an admissible member of a class without necessarily preserving a parse tree (like a non-constructive existence proof.) Annex H notwithstanding, the only advantage of "deterministic" content models is forwards compatibility with unreviewed 8879. Arjun -- "Features whose purpose is to cause errors should be removed" -- Erik Naggum
Received on Friday, 18 October 1996 18:19:13 UTC