Le 14/11/2012 01:39, L. David Baron a écrit : > It doesn't say that anything matching general_enclosed is invalid; > it says that things that don't match the grammar are invalid. You’re right of course. I shouldn’t do review specs at such hours, sorry :) > I can probably make this clearer by adding: > > (i.e., one that does not match this loose grammar which includes > the general_enclosed production) > > between "grammar above" and "is invalid". Reading carefully now I think the current text is good enough, although this addition could not hurt. -- Simon SapinReceived on Wednesday, 14 November 2012 07:38:22 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:21 UTC