You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I would advocate for making the definition of sequences more fine-grained. Currently you can only say that some port is either a sequence (0 or more) or not (always 1 document).
I often have situations where I have ports that emit 0 or 1 document. Or always more than one.
So at least the "DTD" distinction would be nice (?, *, +).
We maybe could add this to the sequence attribute of port definitions? Something like sequence="?"
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I would advocate for making the definition of sequences more fine-grained. Currently you can only say that some port is either a sequence (0 or more) or not (always 1 document).
I often have situations where I have ports that emit 0 or 1 document. Or always more than one.
So at least the "DTD" distinction would be nice (
?
,*
,+
).We maybe could add this to the
sequence
attribute of port definitions? Something likesequence="?"
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: