• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: XML Schema: At Least One of X Elements Must Appear
• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 22:03:38 +1000
• References: <3A967FE7B99E134C9FE65E2C136560300DE932@l...><010d01c246e0$0060d5c0$4bc8a8c0@A...> <f5b65y7kuxt.fsf@c...>

From: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@c...>

> You guys are all forgetting your history!  At least one of {a, b, c},
> in any order, is expressible in DTD, and therefore _a posteriori_ in
> W3C XML Schema:
> 
>  <!ELEMENT x ((a,((b,c?)|(c,b?))?)|(b,((a,c?)|(c,a?))?)|(c,((a,b?)|(b,a?))?))>
> 
> It's certainly not elegant, and it gets worse as the number of
> alternatives goes up, but it's not impossible.

Is that what he was asking for?  He said
"at least one of the following X elements must appear in the XML document" 
not
"at least one of the following X elements must appear in an element"

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML Schema: At Least One of X Elements Must Appear
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• References:
  • XML Schema: At Least One of X Elements Must Appear
    • From: "CHIUSANO, Joseph" <JCHIUSANO@l...>
  • Re: XML Schema: At Least One of X Elements Must Appear
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
  • Re: XML Schema: At Least One of X Elements Must Appear
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• Prev by Date: Re: WXS acronym?
• Next by Date: RE: XML Schema: At Least One of X Elements Must Appear
• Previous by thread: Re: XML Schema: At Least One of X Elements Must Appear
• Next by thread: Re: XML Schema: At Least One of X Elements Must Appear
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread