Hi Folks, First of all I would like to wish a merry Christmas to you all. Hope everyone is having a great time. :)
And now to the business. I have encountered a couple of issues in the XPath 2.0 grammar for type alternatives specified in the XML Schema 1.1 Structures specification. I would like to have some comments regarding them. 1. According to the grammar '<' is a valid character in the subset of allowed XPath expressions. But it seems to violate a restriction in the XML 1.0 specification. The XML 1.0 spec says; [10] AttValue ::= '"' ([^<&"] | Reference<file:///home/hiranya/Documents/xsdl-specs/Extensible%20Markup%20Language%20%28XML%29%201.0%20%28Fifth%20Edition%29.html#NT-Reference>)* '"' | "'" ([^<&'] | Reference<file:///home/hiranya/Documents/xsdl-specs/Extensible%20Markup%20Language%20%28XML%29%201.0%20%28Fifth%20Edition%29.html#NT-Reference>)* "'" So it seems '<' is not a valid character for an attribute value. But in type alternatives, test expressions are specified as attribute values. Because of this restriction when a type alternative is specified with the '<' character (eg: @attr < 5) the parser throws a fatal error. 2. The grammar defines a lexical unit called the ValueExpr. [14] ValueExpr ::= *SimpleValue*<file:///home/hiranya/Documents/xsdl-specs/W3C%20XML%20Schema%20Definition%20Language%20%28XSD%29%201.1%20Part%201%3A%20Structures.html#ta-SimpleValue>| *ConstructorFunction*<file:///home/hiranya/Documents/xsdl-specs/W3C%20XML%20Schema%20Definition%20Language%20%28XSD%29%201.1%20Part%201%3A%20Structures.html#ta-ConstructorFunction> But none of the other productions refer it. Hence there is no real meaning in having this production. This was pointed out to me by Khaled a few months back as well. WDYT? Thanks Best Regards, Hiranya
