XML and Erlang
Tue Jun 21 09:23:06 CEST 2005
On Jun 21, 2005, at 7:39 AM, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
> Tony Rogvall <tony@REDACTED> 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
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)
More information about the erlang-questions