- From: Michael Dyck <MichaelDyck@shaw.ca>
- Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 00:00:19 -0800
- To: scott_boag@us.ibm.com
- Cc: www-xml-query-comments@w3.org
scott_boag@us.ibm.com wrote: > > I wonder if you could define the PDA/State Transitions in terms of a CFG, > for the purposes of design, and perhaps also to use in the documentation? > This would be worth exploring. You'd probably get fewer bugs in the PDA that way. > The reason the PDA is valuable is because it works with tools like JavaCC > and Lex. It is very important to us that this grammar be easily expressed > by these tools. > > > Ultimately, I wanted to question the need for the XQuery spec to define > > a tokenizer at all. > > I brought this up at the last F2F in Cannes. People were interested in the > idea of doing less tokenization-level specification. We discussed making > most of the lexical section into a non-normative appendix. In other words, > this is how we implemented and verified it, but implementors mayk obviously > do what they want. Yes, that's what I was hoping for. -Michael Dyck
Received on Friday, 22 March 2002 03:01:28 UTC