- From: Shane McCarron <ahby@aptest.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 20:25:06 -0600
- To: Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>
- Cc: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>, Markdown List <public-markdown@w3.org>
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2012 02:25:34 UTC
EBNF is a *standard* way of declaring grammar in an unambiguous fashion. English is notoriously ambiguous. You can write a parser straight from EBNF. There is a reason that the productions in XML (for example) are all done in EBNF. On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com> wrote: > > Le 29 nov. 2012 à 01:28, Dave Pawson a écrit : > > So who is going to have a go at a para in EBNF? > > > What do we solve by having EBNF? > > * for (human) authors > * for parsers > * for converters > > Not clear to me. > > -- > Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/ > Developer Relations, Opera Software > > > -- Shane P. McCarron Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2012 02:25:34 UTC