- From: Éric Bischoff <e.bischoff@noos.fr>
- Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 14:44:58 +0200
- To: "Nikolai Grigoriev" <grig@renderx.com>, <www-xsl-fo@w3.org>
- Cc: <xsl-editors@w3.org>
Le Saturday 26 October 2002 14:00, Nikolai Grigoriev a écrit:
> Eric,
>
> > Even worse : some productions do not match the rest of the document. For
> > example, the production for a function does not admit whitespace, while
> > at several other places whitespace is admitted before '(' or around the
> > arguments.
>
> There is a special clause on this. The first paragraph of
> [5.9.11. Lexical Structure] reads:
>
> XSL> When processing an expression, white space
> XSL> (ExprWhitespace) may be allowed before or
> XSL> after any expression token even though it is not
> XSL> explicitly defined as such in the grammar.
>
> The same approach is also used in XPath spec;
> I don't see any problem here.
There is no problem, excepted that the BNC production says something else.
====================================
5.9.4 Function Calls
[3] FunctionCall ::= FunctionName '(' ( Argument ( ',' Argument)*)? ')'
[4] Argument ::= Expr
====================================
Production [3] should mention 'S' productions before the opening parenthese
and around the arguments.
It's just an inconsistency like many others, that's all.
--
- Do you know the four basic nutrition groups?
- Errr... Hamburger, soda, French fries and dessert?
Received on Saturday, 26 October 2002 08:44:06 UTC