On Sat, May 17, 2025 at 3:00 PM Brian E Carpenter <
brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18-May-25 09:19, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> > On 17. May 2025, at 22:36, Brian E Carpenter <
> brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> However, RFC 9651 explains
> >> exactly why it uses all that Engli
On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 08:41:10AM -0700, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rivest-sexp/ is a good example
> of a language whose ABNF cannot be normative (that's because the s-exp
> variant described in it is non-context free). Even without that, a
> normative ABN
Brian E Carpenter writes:
> I agree with you. It's been pretty clear since BNF was first used
> (strictly speaking, it was just BF for Algol 58, but that was well
> before my time) that some terminations in BNF *require* explanation in
> human language. That doesn't make the formalism useless.
O
