XML and Erlang

Tony Rogvall <>
Tue Jun 21 09:23:06 CEST 2005


On Jun 21, 2005, at 7:39 AM, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:

> Tony Rogvall <> wrote:
>     Suppose I write
>
>          <!ELEMENT a ((b & c & d)* | (c, d))>
>
> Suppose you don't?  That isn't legal XML syntax and never has been.
> While "&" is a feature of SGML that I rather like, it has certain
> technical problems which mean that it was deliberately left out of  
> XML.
>

Suppose you remove the & and replace it with the expansion?

Please let me try to explain.

(a & b) == (a, b)  | (b,a)
(a & b & c) == (a,b,c) | (a,c,b) | (b,a,c) | (b,c,a) | (c,a,b) | (a,b,a)


Then what?

/Tony





More information about the erlang-questions mailing list