- 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