- From: David J. Weller-Fahy <dave-lists-public-markdown@weller-fahy.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 11:39:26 -0500
- To: public-markdown@w3.org
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2012 16:40:22 UTC
* Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> [2012-11-28 11:34 -0500]: > On 28 November 2012 15:33, David J. Weller-Fahy > <dave-lists-public-markdown@weller-fahy.com> wrote: > >> \n as a symbol, defined in the glossary is shorter than EOL or eoln > >> .... > > > > It is shorter, but we could pick something not so loaded with > > previous meaning. > > Sounds sensible. If we can trip over it, so can others. Two options. > 1. EBNF (Other standards groups must have faced this and defined it?) What about using the EBNF form as defined by w3 for XML [1]? [1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-notation I think I'd prefer to go with EBNF now, rather than have to convert later. > Question. Can EBNF define "anything other than ..." as in [^newline]+ > using a bastardised form of regex. I'm not sure, have to take a look into it. -- dave [ please don't CC me ]
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2012 16:40:22 UTC