- From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2022 09:37:39 +0000
- To: Bethan Tovey-Walsh <accounts@bethan.wales>
- Cc: Tom Hillman <tom@expertml.com>, ixml <public-ixml@w3.org>, "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com>
On Thu, 3 Feb 2022 at 09:25, Bethan Tovey-Walsh <accounts@bethan.wales> wrote:
>
> Is it reasonable to posit a 5d. - that comments and pragmata are both subtypes of inline out-of-band information? This could lead to a representation in the grammar along these lines:
>
> oob : “{“, S*, (comment; pragma), S*, “}”.
> comment : whatever.
> pragma : “[“, S*, pragma-name, pragma-data?, S*, “]”.
Nitpicking Bethan ( which is super, which sub I mean).
I'm -1 on using "{" though - we've argued this many times, not from
the syntax view, simply the human perspective?
I'm sure Steven could re-write that the re-use oob as an OR statement though...
if (only if?) the placing of comments / pragmas can occur in the same
place in the grammar, which
from memory I don't think is the case?
regards
--
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.
Received on Thursday, 3 February 2022 09:39:03 UTC