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

Re: RelaxNG question

• To: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@m...>
• Subject: Re: RelaxNG question
• From: Bill de hÓra <bill.dehora@p...>
• Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 22:53:18 +0100
• Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>, XML Dev <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D171A993@R...>
• References: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D171A993@R...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624

Dare Obasanjo wrote:

> Because your favorite schema language does not support the feature does not make it a daft constraint. 

Before you come wading in with your informed opinion, read what I 
posted and see if what you're claiming above actually follows, or if 
it's just so much psychobabble.


>The ability to negate wildcards is an oft requested feature of users of W3C XML Schema and makes sense if one could write something akin to 
> 
> 	<xs:any namespace="not(##targetNamespace)" /> 

No doubt. In RNG's case, I believe you can't negate the class of 
non-namespaced  names. I'm trying to think why you'd want that facility.

Bill de hÓra

-- 
Technical Architect
Propylon
http://www.propylon.com

• References:
  • RE: RelaxNG question
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XACML adding new functions
• Next by Date: RE: RelaxNG question
• Previous by thread: RE: RelaxNG question
• Next by thread: Re: RelaxNG question
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread