Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Actually Kohsuke is right -- (a & b?) is *not* inherently 1-ambiguous. Also I think, the language specified by ((a, b)*, a) cannot be written as an 1-unambiguous regular expression or 1-unambiguous model group -- I think -- when you see an "a" in the string, you do *not* know whether it is the first a or the second a, unless you know whether there is b following it. i think the above example holds for all model groups defined to date -- thanks a lot. are there any opinions/suggestions?? Derek, try to give the content model for ((a, b)*, a), if you are not convinced. thanks and regards - murali. On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, K.Kawaguchi wrote: > > > (a, b? | b?, a) > > Since the above is the equivalent of ( a | ab | ba ), > you can write it as > > (a,b?) | (b,a) > > which is deterministic. > > How about this? > > > (a b)* a? > > > I think this cannot be written by the deterministic content model. > > regards, > ---------------------- > K.Kawaguchi > E-Mail: kohsukekawaguchi@y... > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org, an initiative of OASIS > <http://www.oasis-open.org> > > The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > > To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word > "unsubscribe" in the body to: xml-dev-request@l... >
|
