[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Why ANY is so restrictive?

• From: Toby Speight <Toby.Speight@s...>
• To: "XML developers' list" <xml-dev@x...>
• Date: 11 Feb 2000 11:12:09 +0000

Paul> Paul Tchistopolskii <URL:mailto:paul@q...>

Paul quoted:

>> ANY means any *declared* element.  You still have to declare the
>> elements, and when you declare the elements, you have to declare
>> what their contents can be.


0> In article <00c301bf7372$28616240$5df5c13f@PaulTchistopolskii>,
0> Paul wrote:

Paul> About one year ago I have posted the letter to XML-dev list
Paul> asking was there some practical reason behind making 'ANY' so
Paul> restrictive in XML v 1.0.
Paul>
Paul> I proposed to change the semantics of ANY to 'anything well-formed
Paul> is fine'.
Paul>
Paul> There was a silence on this topic. I got no explanation why ANY
Paul> is so restrictive.
Paul>
Paul> Maybe now somebody would try to explain what was the purpose of
Paul> such a restrictive 'ANY' in XML 1.0?

Because if ANY allowed any well-formed content, you could have a valid
XML document which was not SGML-valid.  The idea of valid XML is that
it can be processed by an SGML parser with an appropriate declaration;
the concept of "well-formed" was invented to allow non-SGML processing
of XML.

I suggest you concentrate your efforts on other schema types than
DTDs, as these other schema types generally apply to all well-formed
XML (not only valid), and may be able to specify what you want.

-- 

• References:
  • Why ANY is so restrictive?
    • From: Paul Tchistopolskii <paul@q...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Frontline report from the Desperate Fgrep Hacker
• Next by Date: Re: Frontline report from the Desperate Fgrep Hacker
• Previous by thread: Re: Why ANY is so restrictive?
• Next by thread: History of XML-DEV
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread