W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > February 2010

Re: ABNF or code fragments?

From: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:17:48 +0100
Cc: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, Media Fragment <public-media-fragment@w3.org>
Message-Id: <E8128B24-E667-4C4F-8891-74334FC283A2@cwi.nl>
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>

On 23 feb 2010, at 14:00, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:

> 
> Jack, it seems EBNF is being used by ISO
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Backus%E2%80%93Naur_Form 

[...]

Ok, there seems to be an EBNF standard, according to wikipedia: ISO/IEC 14977. Then EBNF is fine with me (as long as we refer to this standard).

I had only heard the term EBNF being used in the generic sense (as used at the top of the wikipedia page: "EBNF is a family of metasyntax notations").

In that case: I couldn't care less whether we use EBNF or ABNF.

--
Jack Jansen, <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, http://www.cwi.nl/~jack
If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma Goldman
Received on Tuesday, 23 February 2010 15:18:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:38 GMT