- From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 11:16:02 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
- cc: public-media-fragment@w3.org
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010, Jack Jansen wrote:
>
> On 21 jun 2010, at 09:41, Yves Lafon wrote:
>
>> During last f2f, we discussed about the possibility to isolate common part of the grammar between header syntax and URI syntax.
>> However the common part would be external definition and at most the time part without the units, like 'frametime' or 'clocktime' (the unit in the header needs a specific entry to avoid implied LWS).
>>
>> So it is worth doing? (Jack, any input?)
>>
>> (tracker this is about ACTION-174)
>
> There's the few "real" nonterminals you sketch, but also a couple that are really indirectly-defined terminals, such as timeprefix, trackprefix, trackparam, etc.
>
> It's not important, really: if you feel it isn't worth doing then let's
> forget about it.
In fact
time-ranges-specifier = timeprefix ":" time-ranges-options
is wrong, it may become "t :ntp" or "t : ntp", because of implied LWS.
I will fix those to be "t:ntp" / ...
--
Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras.
~~Yves
Received on Monday, 21 June 2010 15:16:04 UTC