[relaxng-user] missing start elementt
David Tolpin
dvd at davidashen.net
Sat Nov 29 23:54:16 ICT 2003
> Um, I think not. Simplification rule 4.18 clearly states "A grammar must
> have a start child element."
> This is after the previous simplification rules has been applied. More
> specifically "4.7. include element"
> is interesting in this situation.
>
> start = element foo { grammar { include "grammar-with-start.rnc" }}
>
> Provided that the included grammar does have a start pattern,
> this is a perfectly valid schema and this shows that you cannot
> require a start in the grammar before the simplification.
David,
you are right, thank you. Another question:
why is, in the compact syntax, top-level '"grammar" "{" ... "}"' is optional for the main
module but required for included and referenced modules? (That is, why jing and nXML
both require it)? The spec says that it "must be a grammar".
Why implicit grammar is not allowed?
David
More information about the relaxng-user
mailing list