• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: patterns and restrictions
• From: David Tolpin <dvd@d...>
• Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 21:11:27 +0400 (AMT)
• In-reply-to: <005001c3c4bc$a2aeb440$ac00a8c0@aldebaran>

> > Therefore, I would think that 'pattern' defines a subset of 
> > the lexical space of the type it is applied to.
> 
> 
> My understanding is that the "pattern" facet is a very special facet, in
> that it constrains two different things:
> 
....
> 
> "Normal" facets (except "pattern") don't care about the lexical
> representation.  Any lexical form that is legal for the values in the value
> space may be used in instances, and will "represent" one of those values.
> "Pattern" is different.
> 
> Alessandro Triglia

So, does 'pattern' restrict lexical space of the type it is applied to,
or defines it anew?

David Tolpin

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: patterns and restrictions
    • From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>

• Prev by Date: RE: The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint
• Next by Date: Re: patterns and restrictions
• Previous by thread: RE: DTD and Schema Teasers
• Next by thread: Re: patterns and restrictions
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread