Hi Norm,
You may find interesting Tim Bray's comment [1] on that in his annotated
XML spec [2]:
[1] http://www.xml.com/axml/notes/Determinism.html
***
Deterministic Grammars
This stuff is not worth worrying about. This rule was inherited from
SGML; its inclusion in SGML was actually a design error. This was
retained in XML not only for compatibility with SGML (not quite a good
enough reason; I voted against it) but because some of the most popular
existing SGML tools actually rely on it for certain internal optimizations.
It's likely that quite a few XML products will never bother checking for
violations of this rule, because it's hard; if you're writing a DTD and
you get a complaint about a nondeterministic content model, then you
might find it worthwhile to read the appendix.
***
[2] http://www.xml.com/axml/target.html#determinism
Best Regards,
George
--
George Cristian Bina
<oXygen/> XML Editor, Schema Editor and XSLT Editor/Debugger
http://www.oxygenxml.com
On 4/2/10 2:18 AM, Norman Walsh wrote:
> Norman Walsh<> writes:
>> Here's a better version. I've fixed the duplicate attribute
>> declarations caused by attribute co-constraints and a number of other
>> little bugs. The dcterms: namespaced elements should also work better.
>
> Here's an even better still version. This now passes muster in Xerces
> and Saxon. Like the base DocBook DTD, I think it's interesting that
> nsgmls reports ambiguous content models that neither Xerces nor Saxon
> notice. For the moment, I'm not going to try to fix those, I'm not
> sure it's practical.
>
>
>
>
> Be seeing you,
> norm
>
