- From: MacAndrew, Tim <tmacandrew@NetSilicon.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 09:35:42 -0700
- To: <zongaro@ca.ibm.com>, <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Hello Henry, Thank you for responding to my e-mail about the <restriction> statement in XML Schema. Thank you for referencing the sections of the Schema documents that clarify the usage of the <restriction> statement. However, it does appear that the use of the Kleene Operator in the XML Schema document is incorrect. I don't believe it is valid to define "conditions" that change the definition of the "*" operator. Since the "*" operator is _defined_ to mean "zero or more occurrences of", it is erroneous to then (verbally) qualify the operator in other sections of the document. This is similar to changing the meaning of the mathematical "+" operator. I believe the production rule for the definition of the <restriction> statement is invalid and the editors should correct it. (Reference: XML Schema Part 1: Structures - 3.4.2 XML Representation of Complex Type Definitions http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-1-20010502/#element-simpleConten t::restriction) I must say that I'm impressed with the "XML Schema Quality Checker" developed at IBM. That tool has eliminated much of the confusion intrinsic to the Schema documents from the W3C. Thank you. Tim MacAndrew e-mail: TMacAndrew@NetSilicon.com
Received on Friday, 28 September 2001 12:35:45 UTC