|
[XMLSCHEMA-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: [xml-dev] Two Questions - on XML Schema
From: Pete Cordell <petexmldev@tech-know-ware.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 19:53:19 -0000 Message-ID: <000a01c643b3$2349e490$0600a8c0@RW> To: "Rick Jelliffe" <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>, <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com> Cc: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org> ----- Original Message From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com> > The current thinking, at least among many WG members, is that <all> groups > in their current forms are not usually implemented with the sort of FSM's > that would exhibit combinatorial explosion. Given that all groups are > relatively separate from <sequence> and <choice>, there are > implementations in which simple counters can be used to ensure that the > number of elements seen meets the constraint. > > There is also discussion of more general support, in which <all> can be > mixed with <sequence> and <choice>; in that case, we do have to be very > careful to understand the impact on the more general FSM and on > restriction and extension. For those reasons, I personally am nervous > about proposing to mix <all> with other model groups, though we have had > requests from some users. Support for maxOccurs>1 may well make it into > the working drafts for Schema 1.1. Do you have a timetable on when you will be making decisions about <all>? I was contemplating doing an implementation to verify it, but won't have the resource for 2 or 3 week. Pete. -- ============================================= Pete Cordell Tech-Know-Ware Ltd for XML to C++ data binding visit http://www.tech-know-ware.com/lmx (or http://www.xml2cpp.com) =============================================Received on Thursday, 9 March 2006 19:53:33 GMT |
Subscribe in XML format
|

![Re: [xml-dev] Two Questions - on XML Schema](/images/get_stylus.gif)




