- From: Ross Thompson <rthompson@contivo.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:43:19 -0700
- To: Stanley Guan <Stanley.Guan@oracle.com>
- Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Stanley Guan writes: > Ross, > > Actually, it can be more succinctly represented as: > ".+" > because "." will match the rest of the pattern string. Sorry, no. ".+" does not match the same set of strings as the original expression. It matches "foo.txt", for example, which ".+\.(gif|jpg|jpeg|bmp)" does not. > My point is: > For the particles, they are subject to ambiguity constraints ( > Unique Attribution ($3.8.6)). For example, if an instance > element could match either an explicit particle and a wildcard > that model is in error. > > Do we have something similar to Unique Attribution for patterns? > In my original posting, there was a typo. The better specification > is > <pattern value="[^\.]+\.(gif|jpg|jpeg|bmp)"/> > > which is not ambiguous. And I don't think most of the schema > processor will try to roll back and find a better matching as described > in Kongyi's response! I missed the early part of this discussion, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. However, you can't write a regular expression matcher that behaves correctly without considering the case where the first two characters in ".+\.gif" match less than the entire string. - Ross --- I have the heart of a little child. I keep it in a jar on my desk. -- unknown
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2001 14:43:30 UTC