W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > January 1997

Re: Production 21 (and others)

From: Michael Sperberg-McQueen <U35395@UICVM.UIC.EDU>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 97 21:08:39 CST
Message-Id: <199702010326.WAA09131@www10.w3.org>
To: W3C SGML Working Group <w3c-sgml-wg@www10.w3.org>
On Thu, 30 Jan 1997 22:32:49 -0500 Dave Peterson said:
>At 4:30 PM 1/30/97, lee@sq.com wrote:
>>Folks, please stop this.
>>It won't help implementors.
>>It won't help users.
>> ...
>Quite.  There is no rule engraved in stone that every aspect and
>restriction of the language must be captured in the productions.  That
>which can without terrible complication should (8879 probably erred the
>other way) but there is no point in evolving more and more complicated
>productions except as an academic exercise.  I too vote to kill this

OK, I'll drop it.  Before I do, I will just register my continued
opinion that the syntax of XML should be wholly explicit, where
mechanisms as simple as regular expressions suffice to describe it.

Indirection and hand-waving of the type recommended by Lee and Dave
are a recipe for inconsistent and incompatible implementations.  If
this recent indulgence in academic exercises in regular-expression
writing has shown anything, it is that a surprising number of
intelligent people with an interest in parsing and grammars can *fail*
to formalize them correctly when working from a natural-language
description, and trying to express them without recourse to scanning

I think having full regular expressions defining comments, etc., is in
fact useful to implementors.  If not, then, well, it's an academic
exercise.  Since my salary, and the time I spend on XML, are paid by
an academic institution, I make no apology for being interested in
academic exercises.

C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Received on Friday, 31 January 1997 22:26:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:25:07 UTC