Re: Error definition

I’m inclined to agree with Dave. I wouldn’t call it an error if the implementation were only a recogniser: it would make sense in that context for the outcomes “yes, this is a sentence” and “no, this is not a sentence” to be of (potentially) equal interest and value. But the point of the ixml parser is to provide vxml output, not to tell you whether your input string is a valid sentence or not. If it can’t provide that output, I’d call that an error.

Happy to hear why I’m wrong, though; my instinctive understanding is sometimes way off base. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On 4 Feb 2022, at 09:36, Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> O Regan, Gonorill, your old kind father
> Whose franke heart gaue you all, O that way madnes lies,
> Let me shun that, no more of that.
> -Bill S
> 
> When I compile a programming language program,
> I may get warnings, but (to me) the compile either
> succeeds or fails.
> 
> I would hope that with an ixml grammar and input string
> I can rely on the same reasoning? Pass / fail (or pass,
> with warnings). From this I expect my vxml output to
> be complete, no 'missing bits'?
> 
> I'm using a Saxon class implementation, so if it has a bug
> I can look for a blue moon.
> 
> Is this assumption reasonable / agreed?
> 
> 
> 
> regards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dave Pawson
> XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
> Docbook FAQ.
>

Received on Friday, 4 February 2022 12:00:14 UTC