Re: what I learned from today's discussion of delimiters

Largely in agreement with Michaels comments. One query and one issue

On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 at 04:27, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
<cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> wrote:


> We mentioned briefly today the idea that a processor that does not
> implement any pragmas could work internally with a modified version of
> the ixml grammar that did treat pragmas as a kind of comment.  This idea
> does not, I think, stand up under closer examination.  To the extent
> that pragmas have any internal structure, any conforming processor must
> check that internal structure, since our spec requires that
> nonconforming grammars be rejected.  To the extent that pragmas have no
> internal structure, or a very simple one, the gain in simplicity from
> using a modified grammar would be negligeable.


A processor writer that does not implement pragmas.
MSM states that he/she must check the internal structure?
  I would hope that the implementation might simply seek the matching delimiter
(nesting assumed).
 Is this what you mean by 'checking the internal structure' Michael?
If not then you're putting a lot of work (and nuisance value) on that
implementation IMHO.

Issue - minor.
   I'm assuming we pick a non ASCII delimiter. In emacs, easy. What
experience do we
have of other editors on other OS's? How easy is it to generate a
visible Unicode glyph
on other editors?

Other than this I'm happy to let others choose any such character.  I
do like 'matching' pairs,
so my personal preference might be guillemets for no other reason.

regards

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.

Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2022 07:55:28 UTC