- From: Priscilla Walmsley <priscilla@walmsley.com>
- Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 13:16:37 -0400
- To: "'Ashok Malhotra'" <ashokma@microsoft.com>, <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>, "Henry Thompson" <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Hi Ashok, I agree with all your comments, except that I think it should be: B64lastline ::= B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? (B64x4 | (B64 B64 B16 '=') | (B64 B04 '==')) #xA Thanks, Priscilla > -----Original Message----- > From: www-xml-schema-comments-request@w3.org > [mailto:www-xml-schema-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of > Ashok Malhotra > Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 10:36 AM > To: Priscilla Walmsley; www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > Subject: RE: Problems with Erratum E2-9 (base64Binary) > > > > Priscilla: > I recall we introduced some bugs when we put the approved > text into the > errata document and/or the 2nd Edition. I cannot trace the > history but > the errata and the 2nd edition need to be corrected as below: > > > 1. The Base64Binary production refers to Base64final, which should > > really be B64final. > Yes, the production should read: Base64Binary ::= S? B64quartet* > B64final? > This needs to be fixed in the 2nd Edition as well. > > > > 2. The B64line production is missing one B64x15 (There are only 61 > > rather than 76 B4's). > Yes, production should read > B64line ::= B64x15 B64x15 B64x15 B64x15 B64x15 B64 #xA > /* 76 Base64 characters followed by newline > */ > This is correct in the 2nd Edition. > > > > 3. B64x4, used in the B64lastline production, is never defined. > Should be defined as: B64x4 ::= B64 B64 B64 B64 > This is defined in the 2nd Edition > > > > 4. The B64lastline production has an extra right parenthesis. > This should read: > B64lastline ::= B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? > B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? > B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? > B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? B64x4? > B64x4? B64x4? > (B64x4 | (B64 B64 B16 '=') | (B64 B04 > '==') > #xA > This needs to be fixed in the second edition as well. > > All the best, Ashok > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: www-xml-schema-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:www-xml-schema- > > comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Priscilla Walmsley > > Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 6:08 AM > > To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > > > > > > I was rereading erratum E2-9 and noticed a few errors in the > > productions: > > > > 1. The Base64Binary production refers to Base64final, which should > > really be B64final. > > > > 2. The B64line production is missing one B64x15 (There are only 61 > > rather than 76 B4's). > > > > 3. B64x4, used in the B64lastline production, is never defined. > > > > 4. The B64lastline production has an extra right parenthesis. > > > > Thanks, > > Priscilla > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 1 May 2003 13:16:48 UTC