- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:04:12 -0500
- To: "Mason Lee" <mgl@netspace.org>
- Cc: eddie@allette.com.au, xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Mason Lee asks: >> Out of curiousity, does anyone have any >> links to discussions as to why >> this sort of constraint wasn't included >> in the W3C XML Schema? My note of Nov. 9 covers some of the history regarding "all". Though I was specifically responding to a question about deriving extensions, the reasons for limiting maxOccurs to 1 are: an 80/20 cut attempting to keep it simple and to meet a basic need for mapping to unordered fields. Hope this helps. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlschema-dev/2001Nov/0109.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2001 17:16:58 UTC