- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 19:58:29 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2196 ------- Comment #1 from cmsmcq@w3.org 2006-09-19 19:58 ------- There does seem to be a discrepancy between the two locations. But instead of making 2.1.1 more complicated, I think it would be simpler to address the case where the outermost group has min=max=0 with a separate clause (a new 2.1.4, that is), so that the beginning of 2.1 reads: 2.1 If one of the following is true 2.1.1 There is no <group>, <all>, <choice> or <sequence> among the [children]; 2.1.2 There is an <all> or <sequence> among the [children] with no [children] of its own excluding <annotation>; 2.1.3 There is a <choice> among the [children] with no [children] of its own excluding <annotation> whose minOccurs [attribute] has the ·actual value· 0; 2.1.4 The only <group>, <all>, <choice> or <sequence> among the [children] has a maxOccurs [attribute] with an actual value of 0; , then the appropriate case among the following: ... (I entertained an alternative analysis, that this case was correctly excluded, so as to create an unsatisfiable particle, but min=0 is never unsatisfiable, and min=max=0 is satisfied by the empty sequence, no matter what the min and max are on. So the particle created in the status quo accepts the empty sequence, and only the empty sequence. We might as well make it use the keyword.)
Received on Tuesday, 19 September 2006 19:58:39 UTC