dtd question
 

Hi all,


Here is an element of my the DTD I wrote :

<!ELEMENT uMeshPart (coordinateSystem?, nodeList?,
edgeList?, faceList?, uElementList?,
uElementGroup*, group*)>

Now my question : I dont want to have any order between
the elements of a <uMeshPart>, but as i wrote it it seems
to have one. What can i change in the definition of the
uMeshPart to avoid having this order between elements.

Anyone an idea ?

greets

--
Thibault Volpert

Re: dtd question
 

thibault volpert wrote:

> Now my question : I dont want to have any order between
> the elements of a <uMeshPart>, but as i wrote it it seems
> to have one. What can i change in the definition of the
> uMeshPart to avoid having this order between elements.

(element1, element2) is a list of elements in that order
(element1 | element2) is a list of elements in any order

--
Klaus Johannes Rusch
KlausRusch@atmedia.net
http://www.atmedia.net/KlausRusch/

Re: dtd question
 

Klaus Johannes Rusch wrote:
> (element1 | element2) is a list of elements in any order

Nope, it's _one of_ element1 or element2.
--
Johannes Koch
In te domine speravi; non confundar in aeternum.
(Te Deum, 4th cent.)

Re: dtd question
 

Johannes Koch wrote:
>
> Klaus Johannes Rusch wrote:
> > (element1 | element2) is a list of elements in any order
>
> Nope, it's _one of_ element1 or element2.

Is there a syntax for a list of element in any order ?

Thanks
--
Thibault Volpert

Re: dtd question
 

thibault volpert wrote:
> Johannes Koch wrote:
>
>>Klaus Johannes Rusch wrote:
>>
>>>(element1 | element2) is a list of elements in any order
>>
>>Nope, it's _one of_ element1 or element2.
>
>
> Is there a syntax for a list of element in any order ?

For exactly one element each in any order? No, AFAIK not with DTD.
--
Johannes Koch
In te domine speravi; non confundar in aeternum.
(Te Deum, 4th cent.)

Re: dtd question
 

thibault volpert wrote:

> Is there a syntax for a list of element in any order ?

If the number of elements is small, you may be able to list all valid
options, something like this:
((element1,(element2,element3)|(element3,element2) )|(element2,(element1,element3)|(element3,element1 ))|(element3,(element1,element3)|(element3,element 1)))

Not really feasible for a large number of elements, though.

--
Klaus Johannes Rusch
KlausRusch@atmedia.net
http://www.atmedia.net/KlausRusch/

Re: dtd question
 

thibault volpert <noaddress@stop.invalid> writes:

> Hi all,
>
>
> Here is an element of my the DTD I wrote :
>
> <!ELEMENT uMeshPart (coordinateSystem?, nodeList?,
> edgeList?, faceList?, uElementList?,
> uElementGroup*, group*)>
>
> Now my question : I dont want to have any order between
> the elements of a <uMeshPart>, but as i wrote it it seems
> to have one. What can i change in the definition of the
> uMeshPart to avoid having this order between elements.

A. Is the order in which things appear in the input significant?
(That is, does it have a meaning for the processor?) If so, then what
you want is the equivalent of the SGML & operator:

<!ELEMENT uMeshPart (coordinateSystem? & nodeList? &
edgeList? & faceList? & uElementList? &
uElementGroup* & group*)>

This does insist that all the occurrences of uElementGroup appear
together, and ditto for the group elements.

In XML Schema you can just about do this, except that the XML Schema
'all' connector doesn't allow maxOccurs > 1; if I needed to do this
with XML Schema, I'd replace the uElementGroup* and group* with
uElementGroups and groups elements, which wrap the multiply occurring
uElementGroup and group elements. In XML Schema 1.1 some people are
hoping to relax the requirement that maxOccurs be at most 1; that
might help you here.

An alternative is to allow the DTD to over-generate and write

<!ELEMENT uMeshPart (coordinateSystem | nodeList |
edgeList | faceList | uElementList |
uElementGroup | group)*>

and make the application check to make sure that only uElementGroup
and group occur more than once. I don't advise this, as it will
inevitably lead to dirty data.

If you really want to allow any order, you can write it in XML DTD
notation, as Klaus Johannes Rusch has pointed out, but the result will
be very hard to understand; there are thirty-two different sequences
in which the five elements which can occur at most once could occur,
and you have to list them all.

B. If, on the other hand, the sequence of items has no significance
for your application, then the content model you have written is quite
correct: it shows very clearly that the sequence in which
coordinateSystem, nodeList, etc., occur in the document can have no
significance for the application.

-C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
World Wide Web Consortium

Re: dtd question
 

Thanks for all the answers.

--
Thibault Volpert