Norman Walsh wrote:
> The content model of db.phrase includes *all* the inlines. So if, for example,
> db.phrase was allowed inside abbrev, then this would be legal:
>
> <abbrev><phrase><constant>PI</constant></phrase></abbrev>
>
> even though this *is not* legal:
>
> <abbrev><constant>PI</constant></abbrev>
> ...
> Make sense?
I think so. Let me paraphrase my understanding: for purposes of
validation, a doc which includes db.phrase and/or db._phrase elements
will validate against the DB schema if and only if the doc validates
when the <phrase>, <_phrase>, </phrase> and </_phrase> tags are simply
omitted, with one potential exception. The exception would be if the
<phrase> or <_phrase> elements were marked with invalid attributes.
So for purposes of validation, the db.phrase and db._phrase elements are
"transparent."
Is that correct?
--
Mike Maxwell
What good is a universe without somebody around to look at it?
--Robert Dicke, Princeton physicist
