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

[Bug 1383] [XQuery] some editorial comments on A.2 Lexical structure

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 20:19:25 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1DuyYn-0005uu-3e@wiggum.w3.org>


------- Additional Comments From scott_boag@us.ibm.com  2005-07-19 20:19 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> Is there a context for which '>>' and '>' '>' are both valid continuations?

Not if you don't consider non-legal sentences.  Another case is
"descendant-or-self" vs. "descendant" which can occur in the same context.  In
my parser oriented mind, you need to decide if descendant-or-self::foo has
"descendant" followed by some other characters, vs. "descendant-or-self", thus
you keep searching for the longest token that matches.  On the other hand,
you're saying, in terms of the spec, if keyword delimitation is clear, which I
think it is, there's only one choice: "descendant-or-self", which is either
legal or not.  If "descendant-or-self::foo" could be interpreted as 
"descendant - or-self::foo" (i.e. a subtraction operation), then we would need a
longest token rule perhaps.

In summary, after thinking about it more, I can't justify having the longest
token rule, especially when the spec requires no specific tokenization spec.

So, I'm leaning on the side that this rule should be deleted.  I'm interested if
any other WG members can justify it.
Received on Tuesday, 19 July 2005 20:19:27 UTC

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