- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 07 Jul 2001 15:20:16 +0100
- To: "choi jongwon" <jwchoi@digiweb21.com>
- Cc: <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
"choi jongwon" <jwchoi@digiweb21.com> writes: > this question is about pointless of Partiles in Structure spec. > > 3.9.6 > ... > Schema Component Constraint: Particle Valid(Restriction) > ... > ... > <choice> > One of the following must be true: > 2.2.1 {particles} is empty "and the particle within which this <choice> appears has {min occurs} of 0. " > 2.2.2 All of the following must be true: > 2.2.2.1 The particle within which this <choice> appears has {max occurs} and {min occurs} of 1. > 2.2.2.2 One of the following must be true: > 2.2.2.2.1 The <choice>'s {particles} has only one member. > 2.2.2.2.2 The particle within which this <choice> appears is itself among the {particles} of a <choice>. > > in above 2.2.1, > i cannot understand why "and the particle within which this <choice> appears has {min occurs} of 0." is appended... > "{particles} is empty" is not enough?.. Because <choice/> is unsatisfiable. It's like AND and OR considered as n-ary functions: AND() is true ; including <sequence/> as a required part of a content model does not change what it validates OR() is false ; including <choice/> as a required part of a content model ensures that it never validates anything So for <choice/> to be pointless, it must be optional. ht -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
Received on Saturday, 7 July 2001 10:20:13 UTC