W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: We need a EBNF spec

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 19:24:32 +0000 (UTC)
To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Cc: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, spec-prod@w3.org, www-qa@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0601091916480.9516@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Felix Sasaki wrote:
> > 
> > Personally I would discourage the use of BNF, however, as it makes it 
> > very difficult to define error handling rules, and specifications 
> > often forget to define how to go from the parsed tree to the semantics 
> > that the specification defines, leaving it up to UA implementors to 
> > work out the implied mapping.
> > 
> > For example, as far as I can tell, there is nothing in the XML 1.0 
> > spec that says what the syntax of an XML Declaration (as found in a 
> > prolog) is.
> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#NT-XMLDecl does not fulfill your needs?

Nowhere in the prose does it say that the "XMLDecl" production is the XML 
Declaration. That is entirely my point.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 9 January 2006 19:24:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:19:13 GMT