[tei-council] more on constraint

[Sebastian Rahtz]

Syd Bauman wrote:

> OK, right. Then you'd still keep
> 
>   element content { att.global.attributes, ( macro.schemaPattern | valList )* }
> 
> and say that 
> 
>   <content>
>     <rng:duck/>
>   </content>
> 
> is essentially equivalent to 
> 
>   <constraint type="TEI-required" scheme="relaxng">
>     <data>
>       <rng:duck/>
>     </data>
>   </constraint>
yes, thats my thinking

> Question: why is that "*" not a "+" in the definition of <content>?

indeed. I can't see a reason. I'm trying a build with + and
if it passes all tests I will leave it there. It does seem
unreasonable to allow an empty content



-- 
Sebastian Rahtz
Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431

Sólo le pido a Dios
que el futuro no me sea indiferente