Re: samples directory (action 20220215-01)

"C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> writes:
> In fulfillment of the action I took today, I have created an
> ixml/samples directory (the action said ixml/grammars but I don't think
> anyone cared much about the name, and 'samples' seemed better when
> thought about it. Franklin Delano Roosevelt agreed when I consulted
> him.)

Cool. I have a suggestion, however. Instead of putting all the grammars
in the samples directory, I suggest that each sample have its own
directory. That means it can (and should) have its own README and
possibly a sample input or two.

> For that matter, I found writing an ixml grammar to require the correct
> check digit also more challenging than I had expected.  If time allows,
> I expect to add ISBN-10 and ISSN to the grammar as well.)

I wonder how hard it would be to add logical assertions as annotations
in the grammar. “Reject this if the following extra-grammatical
condition doesn’t hold…”

Writing grammars such that the check digits are enforced by the grammar
may be amusing, but it doesn’t strike me as exceptionally practical in
the general case.

> What do people think about
>
>   - Mail headers (RFC 822 and successors)
>   
>   - IETF dates, ISO dates, ...
>
>   - The lexical spaces of the built-in datatypes of XSD
>
>   - XPath and XSD regular expressions; other regex notations
>
>   - XSLT match patterns (as distinct from XPath in general)
>
>   - The subset of XPath which XSD processors are required to support for
>     uniqueness constraints and assertions
>
>   - REx grammar notation
>
>   - Turtle, N3, other notations used in Semantic Web work
>
>   - A grammar that can read XML and produce a kind of rudimentary
>     representation of the XML (not, as things currently stand, the XML
>     an XML parser would produce)
>
>   - A rational form of CSV (if such a thing exists)
>
>   - Some flavor of Markdown (there are so many to choose from) or one of
>     its competitors.  Given our use of Github, perhaps Github-flavored
>     Markdown would be helpful.
>
> Are those worth trying to find grammars for and/or create ixml grammars
> for?

Absolutely!

Are library MARC (MARK?) records a possibility?

> The more examples we can think of, the better.  I think people should
> get double points for suggestions in non-computer domains, and double
> points again if there is something like an authoritative definition of
> the language in question.  

Challenge accepted!

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

--
Norm Tovey-Walsh
Saxonica