- From: Peintner, Daniel (ext) <daniel.peintner.ext@siemens.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 08:52:13 +0000
- To: Takuki Kamiya <tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com>, "public-exi@w3.org" <public-exi@w3.org>
Hi Taki, I do fully agree with your statement that supporting the use of Schema-informed Element Fragment Grammar instead of Built-in Element Grammar is rather simple (I did explore it in EXIficient also). That said, I think we are seeking for an even more general option to use "static grammars" across the entire EXI processing. For that I think we also need to consider schema-less cases where there is no Schema-informed Element Fragment Grammar (besides Built-in Element Grammar we do also have Built-in Fragment Grammar which may evolve). Thanks! -- Daniel ________________________________ Von: Takuki Kamiya [tkamiya@us.fujitsu.com] Gesendet: Montag, 16. Mai 2016 21:03 An: public-exi@w3.org Betreff: Element Fragment grammar use in stead of Built-in Element Grammar Hi, As per the discussion in the last telecon, I experimented with the use of Element Fragment Grammer in lieu of built-in Element Grammar to see how easy the change would be in current implementations. I did this in OpenEXI, and the amount of change was just 7 lines of additional code in a single Java class. Therefore, I consider supporting the use of Element Fragment Grammer is simple enough. Thank you, Takuki Kamiya Fujitsu Laboratories of America
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2016 08:52:45 UTC