[Bug 1540] New: [FS] editorial: 2.4.4. Top level definitions from bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org on 2005-07-10 (public-qt-comments@w3.org from July 2005)

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 08:24:20 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Cc:
Message-Id: <E1DrX6q-00071k-V7@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1540

           Summary: [FS] editorial: 2.4.4. Top level definitions
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Last Call drafts
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Formal Semantics
        AssignedTo: simeon@us.ibm.com
        ReportedBy: jmdyck@ibiblio.org
         QAContact: public-qt-comments@w3.org


2.4.4. Top level definitions

[41 (Formal)] Definitions ::= Definition*
    A right-recursive production would better suit the inference rules in
    5.10:
        Definitions ::= | Definition Definitions
    or
        Definitions ::= ( Definition Definitions )?

Examples
    In the middle of the examples, I get lost, forgetting whether the text
    between them is a like a title (preceding the example) or a caption
    (following).  It would be slightly clearer if the text before each
    example ended with a colon.

Received on Sunday, 10 July 2005 08:24:23 UTC