• From: "Joshua E. Smith" <jesmith@k...>
• To: "XML Developers' List" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:51:27 -0400

At 11:37 AM 5/13/99 -0700, David LeBlanc wrote:
>Would (S1? | S2? | S3? | (C1 | C2 | C3)*) work?

Nope.  That would allow only one of S1, S2, or S3.  I need to allow up to
one of each, in any order.

As was pointed out in a separate, but coincidentally related, thread, you'd
have to put a * at the end of that, which suddenly loses singletonness.  Alas.

But I guess the & syntax from SGML is deceptively simple.  I don't
completely follow that other thread, but I gather it's hard to implement
which is probably why they left it out of XML.

-Joshua Smith


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • Re: Singletons in a DTD
    • From: terje@i... (Terje Norderhaug)
  • Re: Singletons in a DTD
    • From: David LeBlanc <whisper@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XLink: behavior must go!
• Next by Date: Re: What is W3C's official position on use of PI?
• Previous by thread: Re: Singletons in a DTD
• Next by thread: Aplogies: wrong list!! Please delete immediately
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread