|
[XMLSCHEMA-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: UPA example
From: Florent Georges <lists@fgeorges.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:10:39 +0200 (CEST) To: Pete Cordell <petexmldev@codalogic.com>, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>, 'Boris Kolpackov' <boris@codesynthesis.com>, xmlschema-dev@w3.org Message-ID: <686632.57330.qm@web23005.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Pete Cordell wrote: Hi > Personally I think that, subject to occurrence constraints, the > particle that is currently gobbling up input, should have > priority (i.e. they're greedy). So the following, from the current example: <xs:sequence maxOccurs="unbound"> <xs:element ref="elem"/> <xs:any namespace="##targetNamespace" maxOccurs="unbound"/> </xs:sequence> would be valid, while a bit of an obfuscation because the maxOccurs on the sequence won't be taken into account. Right? Is the above quote what tells XML Schema 1.1? If yes, where it is in the WD? Regards, --drkm _____________________________________________________________________________ Envoyez avec Yahoo! Mail. Une boite mail plus intelligente http://mail.yahoo.frReceived on Wednesday, 25 June 2008 12:11:23 GMT |
Subscribe in XML format
|






