Re: What is a pragma?

On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 at 10:20, Norm Tovey-Walsh <norm@saxonica.com> wrote:
>
> >> We take the position that conformant interpretation of pragmas should
> >> not alter the semantics of an ixml grammar.
> >
> > What does "the semantics of an ixml grammar" mean?
> >
> > What does it mean to alter the semantics?
>
> I thnk what I had in mind was something like the following: if a grammar
> without pragmas recognizes a certain set of sentences, adding pragmas to
> the grammar shouldn’t change the set of sentences it recognizes.

I do like that. Very clear and concise.


>
> >> (You can’t have a conformant pragma that changes the rules!)
> >
> > How would that be enforced?
> >
> > Is the enforcement mechanism that if someone defines a pragma that
> > changes the rules (whatever that might be taken to mean), other people
> > have the right to point at that pragma and say "that one is a
> > non-conforming pragma"?
>
> Yes. Except that I’d probably phrase that as “use of this pragma makes
> the processor behave in a non-conformant way on this grammar.”
>
> My XProc 1.0 implementation has several features that make its behavior
> non-conformant. I don’t consider this a bug, but I do require that the
> user provide an explicit -i-know-this-is-requesting-non-conformant-behavior
> switch to enable it.

I don't think that answers Michaels question Norm? You're not
enforcing conformance,
just recognising non-conformance?

MSM: Is it OK with you to let pragmas break conformance?
Strikes me that if we're letting pragmas loose in the wild, not much we can do
about it?



regards

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

Received on Saturday, 29 January 2022 10:29:05 UTC