- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 19:18:02 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2216 Summary: R-224: Questions about metacharacters in regular expressions Product: XML Schema Version: 1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: XSD Part 2: Datatypes AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org ReportedBy: sandygao@ca.ibm.com QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org Appendix F in the Part 2 of XML Schema 1.0 defines 'metacharacter' thus: A metacharacter is either ., \, ?, *, +, {, } (, ), [ or ]. It defines 'normal character' thus: [Definition:] A normal character is any XML character that is not a metacharacter. In regular expressions, a normal character is an atom that denotes the singleton set of strings containing only itself. Production [10], which I take to be defining normal characters, reads: Normal Character [10] Char ::= [^.\?*+()|#x5B#x5D] The metacharacters all need escapes, so production 24 is also relevant here: Single Character Escape [24] SingleCharEsc ::= '\' [nrt\|.?*+(){} #x2D#x5B#x5D#x5E] I have some questions: 1. shouldn't { and } (braces) be included in production [10]? ? [10] Char ::= [^.\?*+{}()|#x5B#x5D] 2. shouldn't | (vertical bar) be among the characters defined as metacharacters? 3. should ^ (#x5E) be included among the metacharacters? 4. would it be possible to list the magic characters in the same order in 10 and 24, to make eyeball-based comparisons easier? I suspect the answer to (2) is 'yes' and the answer to (3) is 'no, on the theory that the term 'metacharacter' is best reserved for characters which have special meaning at the top level of a regular expression and which must therefore have escapes to avoid ambiguity. Hyphen, circumflex, comma, n, r, and t all have special meaning only in special contexts (within character groups, within quantity-range specifications, or after backslash), and so aren't metacharacters in this sense. See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2003JulSep/0009.html
Received on Wednesday, 14 September 2005 19:18:16 UTC