Lists Home |
Date Index |
very nice solution! typical example of 'not to see the wood for the trees'.
i was only focused on the data types that i've overlooked the role of 'void'.
the only disadvantage of this approach is that the table may stay empty
but this is not really a problem; no content nothing to say :-)
thanx a lot!
Anthony Williams wrote:
> Eike Jordan writes:
> > which means that a table should consist of *one* title and *one-or-more* table-groups.
> > each table-group should consist of *one* title and *one-or-more* of
> > *integer-or-void*, *real-or-void* or *text-or-void*
> > with my approach i'm caught in a trap of an 'ambigous content model':
> > <!ENTITY % real.mix "(real | void)">
> > <!ENTITY % integer.mix "(integer | void)">
> > <!ENTITY % text.mix "(text | void)">
> > <!ENTITY % tableContent.mix "
> > ((%integer.mix;)+) |
> > ((%real.mix;)+) |
> > ((%text.mix;)+)
> > ">
> How about:
> <!ENTITY % tableContent.mix "(void*,(
> (real,(real|void)*) |
> (integer,(integer|void)*) |
> which allows any mix of real-or-void OR any mix of integer-or-void OR any mix
> of text-or-void OR all-void (omit the question mark if all-void is not
Eike Jordan <email@example.com>