Hank Oxford wrote: > Anyone put together errata for the W3C XML Schema draft's Schema schema > or schema DTD? (Is that confusing enough?) I'm trying to cobble > together something that can work with it and have found one small > discrepancy so far. > > The schema schema says: > <modelGroup name="bounds"> > <choice> > <sequence> > <elementTypeRef name="minInclusive" minOccur="0" maxOccur="1"/> > <elementTypeRef name="maxInclusive" minOccur="0" maxOccur="1"/> > </sequence> > <sequence> > <elementTypeRef name="minExclusive" minOccur="0" maxOccur="1"/> > <elementTypeRef name="maxExclusive" minOccur="0" maxOccur="1"/> > </sequence> > </choice> > </modelGroup> > > The DTD says: > <!ENTITY % bounds "((minInclusive | minExclusive)?, > (maxInclusive | maxExclusive)?)"> > > If I'm reading the Schema schema right, well, it's wrong. It wouldn't > allow mixed bounds in the form of, say, a minInclusive and a > maxExclusive. > > The DTD says you may or may not have either a minInclusive or > minExclusive (but not both) and may or may not have either a > maxInclusive or maxExclusive (but not both). I believe the DTD is > correct. [correct schema snipped] You are correct, as is your suggested syntax (except for the commas between attributes and that you have mislabeled a closing choice as a closing sequence). I also noted two other problems: i) In the schema definition of the attribute group "occurrence", the default for maxOccur is 1. This doesn't work, as it means there is no way for maxOccur to be infinity -- the DTD is correct here as well. ii) In the schema for data types (appendix A of part 2), maxOccur of "*" is used. This is illegal because "*" is not an integer. (It looks like the WG played around with different strategies on how to model infinity and didn't catch everything after settling on the current strategy.) -- Ron BourretReceived on Friday, 11 June 1999 03:30:23 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:08:45 UTC