- From: Michael Dyck <jmdyck@ibiblio.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 18:21:00 -0800
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
XQuery 1.0: An XML Query Language
W3C Working Draft 12 November 2003
Here are some comments from
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/2002Nov/0090.html
that did not receive a response from the WG.
It turns out that, in my recent submission:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/2004Feb/0193.html
I already re-stated many of the unanswered comments from the Nov 2002
posting. These two are the remainder.
------
A.2.1 White Space Rules
"white space is needed to disambiguate the token"
In my recent posting, I suggested changing "token" to "grammar".
But I think I prefer what I said in Nov 2002:
The phrase "disambiguate the token" is, I believe, a misuse of
the concept of ambiguity. At any rate, I think it would be
plainer and more accurate to say that whitespace is needed to
prevent two adjacent tokens from being (mis-)recognized as one.
For instance, consider the character-sequence
a- b
Note that there is a space before the 'b'. It thus has only one
derivation from Module (the "a minus b" one), so there is no
ambiguity involved, no disambiguation needed. Nevertheless, it
is still a case in which (I assume) whitespace is needed between
'a' and '-' to prevent the longest-match rule from
(mis-)recognizing 'a-' as a QName.
"Special whitespace notation"
Note that only the *notation* is special. The treatment of
whitespace characters in "ws: explicit" and "ws: significant"
productions is *not* special: they treat them like any other
character, just as the XML spec does. It's the *unmarked*
productions that have special interpretation with respect to
whitespace.
-Michael Dyck
Received on Friday, 13 February 2004 21:21:55 UTC