Re: Rationale for restricted uses of "all"

"Gary Robertson" <gazinyork@hotmail.com> writes:

<snip/>

> What is really needed is for it to be legal to write something like:
> 
> <xs:all>
>   <A minoccurs=0 maxoccurs=unbounded>
>   <B minoccurs=1 maxoccurs=unbounded>
>   <C minoccurs=2 maxoccurs=5>
> </xs:all>
> 
> Although xs:nosequence might be more descriptive than xs:all.

_One_ (not the only) reason in the way of doing this is that the WG
has found that although some people ahve said something like the above 
is what they want, they turn out to mean different things by it.

On _your_ interpretation of the above, would the following be valid:

<C/><B/><C/>

?

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 Tuesday, 20 November 2001 16:52:08 UTC