Hi! Not that this constitutes any major BNF flaw, but the moveto-argument-sequence has a rather fishy cut'n'paste:o-ish reference to lineto-argument-sequence for no apparent reason -- quoting relevant parts: [http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/paths.html#PathDataBNF] moveto: ( "M" | "m" ) wsp* moveto-argument-sequence moveto-argument-sequence: coordinate-pair | coordinate-pair comma-wsp? lineto-argument-sequence ^^^^ lineto: ( "L" | "l" ) wsp* lineto-argument-sequence lineto-argument-sequence: coordinate-pair | coordinate-pair comma-wsp? lineto-argument-sequence It was probably intended to read moveto-argument-sequence there, or, if not, the grammar for moveto: could be rid of its moveto-argument-sequence rule and refer to lineto-argument-sequence rule right away, as in: moveto: ( "M" | "m" ) wsp* lineto-argument-sequence (Though I presume that kind of "optimisation" is not intentional, or it would have been applied in lots of different other places throughout the BNF.) -- / Johan Sundström (Lysator Academic Computer Society)Received on Friday, 6 February 2004 20:30:04 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 4 September 2006 18:11:25 GMT