W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > July 2005

[Bug 1373] [XQuery] some editorial comments on A.1 EBNF (productions)

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 05:18:03 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Cc:
Message-Id: <E1DqlFT-00069a-09@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1373





------- Additional Comments From scott_boag@us.ibm.com  2005-07-08 05:18 -------
Editorial change notes:

> Instead, you might say
>    "... may help a parser differentiate various constructs"

Done

>  I think that the EBNF productions and the explanation of the EBNF notation
>    should each be split into a separate section.

Notation section moved to subsection following the EBNF.

> Pulling some of this together, how about restructuring the preamble into
> something like this:

done.

> I think these would be clearer if you didn't split each of the choices

I don't think the improvement warrents a change at this point.

> [142] StringLiteral
>     Change ('"' '"') to EscapeQuot.
>     Change ("'" "'") to EscapeApos.

Done.

>    If you factor out the overlap of ElementContentChar, QuotAttrContentChar,
>    and AposAttrContentChar, and push it over to CommonContent, I think the
>    result is simpler.

I don't think the improvement warrents a change at this point.

>   I wonder if it would help the reader if the "ws: explicit" productions (and
>   the intervening ones that don't care whether they're "ws: explicit" or not)
>   were put together in a group.

I don't think the improvement warrents a change at this point.
Received on Friday, 8 July 2005 05:18:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:25 UTC