Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
I have been playing with the BNF rules in the XML spec as an exercise in XML tagging. I noticed that in the XML version of the XML spec, the non-terminal symbol "S" is incorrectly tagged in rules 60, 62, and 63, and in consequence it is not hyperlinked in the HTML version. Some comments on the XML tagging in the BNF rules: - it is useful to have the non-terminals tagged, though the way in which it done is a little clumsy, since the internal identifier and the visible name of the non-terminal are necessarily in a one-to-one correspondence. The way it is done seems designed primarily to enable a particular translation to HTML. - it is a shame that there is no tagging to distinguish terminal symbols from metasymbols, since this would enable nicer renditions of the rules, e.g. exploiting colour, without having to parse the BNF - it would seem more logical for each rule to have a single <rhs>, with any <vc> and <wfc> constraints being embedded within the <rhs>, rather than these being separate elements interspersed among multiple <rhs> elements. Two comments on the definition of notation in section 6: - the distinction between non-terminals with an initial upper case and those with an initial lower case is not at all clear (to me). - the precedence of the metalanguage operators (e.g. that "A B | C" means "(A B) | C" is not stated. Thanks to Peter M-R for prompting me to look at this XML exemplar, it has been very stimulating! Mike Kay xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
