- From: Martin J. Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 17:43:07 +0900
- To: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson), "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>
- Cc: "Martin Gudgin" <marting@develop.com>, "Schema Comments" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>, "Dan Rupe" <Dan_Rupe@go.com>
At 00/10/11 18:00 +0100, Henry S. Thompson wrote: >As it stands (wrt <all>) there is nothing in the XML Schema language >whcih precludes implementing content models with absolutely standard >FSM technology. The change you propose would I believe break that. The transformations in the HTML and P3P cases show how it can be done with FSM. So what may be your problem is the blowup. But please note that even with the current <all>, there are n**2 states needed for n elements in an <all> group, so bringing an FSM to its knees look quite easy, and trying to use absolutely standard FSM technology therefore looks like a bad idea anyway. If 20 elements doesn't do the job, 30 should do it. Another question is whether the transform is made by the writer or the machine. It's rather clear that machines are much better at that. Another question is whether there is a requirement on XML Schema to be implementable in particular technologies. I haven't yet heard about any such requirement (i.e. requirement about a particular technology, not about FSMs as such) yet for any W3C technology. Regards, Martin.
Received on Sunday, 15 October 2000 17:51:12 UTC