W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > February 2014

Re: [Bug 24769] New: SVG Path BNF is ambigious

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 22:11:21 +0100
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: "bugzilla@jessica.w3.org" <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3fefg9phgj2fe65dklvvjm2lhrsvfj132a@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>Perhaps reread the bug?  The opening paragraph is:
>
>"There is no description in the text on how this BNF is to be used. For example,
>are the rules for the BNF alternatives to be parsed as 'first match wins'?"
>
>There is a technical issue, in that it's not defined how to read the
>grammar to deal with ambiguous situations, and at least one reasonable
>method of reading it leads to an obviously bad result.

When it is infeasible to make a CFG unambiguous, then such a definition
is certainly necessary. The current question is whether the CFG is ambi-
guous. If somebody can show that it is, then we could see whether there
is a way to make it unambiguous. If there is no good way, then we might
decide to have ambiguity resolution rules in prose. On the other hand,
if nobody can identify an ambiguity in the grammar, then this is not an
issue, only a matter of editorial preferences.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Friday, 21 February 2014 21:11:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:47:35 UTC