[relaxng-user] missing start elementt

David Tolpin dvd at davidashen.net
Sat Nov 29 23:54:16 ICT 2003

> Um, I think not. Simplification rule 4.18 clearly states "A grammar must 
> have a start child element."
> This is after the previous simplification rules has been applied. More 
> specifically "4.7. include element"
> is interesting in this situation.
> start = element foo { grammar { include "grammar-with-start.rnc" }}
> Provided that the included grammar does have a start pattern,
> this is a perfectly valid schema and this shows that you cannot
> require a start in the grammar before the simplification.


you are right, thank you. Another question:

why is, in the compact syntax, top-level '"grammar" "{" ... "}"' is optional for the main
module but required for included and referenced modules? (That is, why jing and nXML
both require it)? The spec says that it "must be a grammar". 

Why implicit grammar is not allowed?


More information about the relaxng-user mailing list