RE: Problems with Erratum E2-9 (base64Binary)

Priscilla:
I recall we introduced some bugs when we put the approved text into the
errata document and/or the 2nd Edition.  I cannot trace the history but
the errata and the 2nd edition need to be corrected as below:

> 1. The Base64Binary production refers to Base64final, which should
> really be B64final.
Yes, the production should read: Base64Binary ::= S? B64quartet*
B64final?
This needs to be fixed in the 2nd Edition as well.
> 
> 2. The B64line production is missing one B64x15 (There are only 61
> rather than 76 B4's).
Yes, production should read
   B64line ::= B64x15 B64x15 B64x15 B64x15 B64x15 B64 #xA
	                   /* 76 Base64 characters followed by newline
*/
This is correct in the 2nd Edition.
> 
> 3. B64x4, used in the B64lastline production, is never defined.
Should be defined as:  B64x4   ::= B64 B64 B64 B64
This is defined in the 2nd Edition
> 
> 4. The B64lastline production has an extra right parenthesis.
This should read: 
B64lastline ::= B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4?
	                       B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4?
	                       B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4?
	                       B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4?
	                       B64x4? B64x4?
	                       (B64x4 | (B64 B64 B16 '=') | (B64 B04
'==')
	                       #xA
This needs to be fixed in the second edition as well.

All the best, Ashok

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-xml-schema-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:www-xml-schema-
> comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Priscilla Walmsley
> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 6:08 AM
> To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
> 
> 
> I was rereading erratum E2-9 and noticed a few errors in the
> productions:
> 
> 1. The Base64Binary production refers to Base64final, which should
> really be B64final.
> 
> 2. The B64line production is missing one B64x15 (There are only 61
> rather than 76 B4's).
> 
> 3. B64x4, used in the B64lastline production, is never defined.
> 
> 4. The B64lastline production has an extra right parenthesis.
> 
> Thanks,
> Priscilla
> 

Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2003 10:36:08 UTC