- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 12:31:36 +0000
- To: Torsten Grust <Torsten.Grust@uni-konstanz.de>
- Cc: "Michael Kay" <mhk@mhk.me.uk>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
Torsten Grust <Torsten.Grust@uni-konstanz.de> writes: > Thanks Henry and Michael for these quick and very helpful responses. > > Only to double-check that I am on the right track now: from your > answers I take it that the XML Schema Unique Particle Attribution > constraint is the same concept as ``weak unambiguity'' (as defined in > Anne Brueggemann-Klein's papers). Yes -- Brueggemann-Klein's work was motivated by the need for a formal definition of what the SGML standard did not succeed in expressing very clearly. > (Which, for example, an XML Schema processor could use during > validation to attach type annotations to XML element nodes.) > > Does this make sense? Indeed, precisely the point. ht -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh Half-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Thursday, 12 February 2004 07:32:55 UTC