- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:56:22 +0000
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org
One comment was wrong: > > [[ > The abstract syntax is specified here by means of a version of Extended > BNF. Terminals are not quoted; non-terminals are enclosed in pointy > brackets ; and alternatives are either separated by vertical bars > (|) or are given in different productions. Elements that can occur at > most once are enclosed in square brackets (; elements that can > occur any number of times (including zero) are enclosed in braces (. > ]] > Qu why not use a more standard EBNF formalism? > e.g. > http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/iso-ebnf.html > You do use this formalism; I retract this question. Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 12 December 2002 08:56:31 UTC