W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > June 2008

Re: UPA example

From: Pete Cordell <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 10:07:09 +0100
Message-ID: <000d01c8d76c$05fdfb70$ea00a8c0@Codalogic>
To: "Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>

- Original Message From: "Michael Kay"

>> Personally I think that, subject to occurrence constraints,
>> the particle that is currently gobbling up input, should have
>> priority (i.e. they're greedy).  ...
>
> Then I suggest you make the suggestion as a comment on the last call spec
> which has just been published.

I'll do that then.  In the mean time, if any one wants to share with me why 
they think the current XSD 1.1 rules are preferable I'd interested to hear 
it.

Thanks,

Pete Cordell
Codalogic
For XML C++ data binding visit http://www.codalogic.com/lmx/
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2008 09:07:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:15:47 UTC