• To: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@a...>
• Subject: Re: DTD and Schema Teasers
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 10:00:34 -0800
• Cc: "'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>,"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• In-reply-to: <1071676378.2359.136.camel@localhost>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9F08B@h...> <1071676378.2359.136.camel@localhost>

On Dec 17, 2003, at 7:52 AM, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen wrote:

>> 1.  Why did XML keep the requirement for deterministic models?
>
> ...James Clark and Tim Bray also argued
> that implementations could make good use of the fact
> that legal models are all deterministic, and wanted
> to retain it for that reason, as well.

For the record: I argued *ferocioiusly* against the non-determinism 
rule and was voted down.  Whereupon I made good use of non-determinism 
in the 'Larval' validation layer on top of the original Lark parser :) 
-Tim

• References:
  • DTD and Schema Teasers
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • Re: DTD and Schema Teasers
    • From: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@a...>

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