Re: Production 21 (and others)
>On Thu, 30 Jan 1997 22:32:49 -0500 Dave Peterson said:
>>At 4:30 PM 1/30/97, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
>>>Folks, please stop this.
>>>It won't help implementors.
>>>It won't help users.
>>Quite. There is no rule engraved in stone that every aspect and
>>restriction of the language must be captured in the productions. That
>>which can without terrible complication should (8879 probably erred the
>>other way) but there is no point in evolving more and more complicated
>>productions except as an academic exercise. I too vote to kill this
>OK, I'll drop it. Before I do, I will just register my continued
>opinion that the syntax of XML should be wholly explicit, where
>mechanisms as simple as regular expressions suffice to describe it.
I totally agree. Credibility amongst implementors is at stake.
If comments are complex enough in regexp to warrant a BNF grammar
instead then I say lets give'em a BNF.