Hi Michael,
On 04/28/2015 11:22 PM, Michael Dyck wrote:
> On 15-04-28 05:17 PM, Michael Dyck wrote:
>> On 15-04-28 04:33 PM, Benito van der Zander wrote:
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> What if it parses it in
>>> 12!(12 div.)
>>> as two tokens?
>>> "." is a terminal symbol, and "div" is not a NCName there, just
part of a
>>> MultiplicativeExpr.
>>
>> As pointed out by Ghislain yesterday, the last paragraph of A.2.2
applies:
>> if a QName or NCName is followed by a "." or "-", the two tokens
must be
>> separated by whitespace and/or Comments.
>
> Oh, sorry, right, you're saying it's not an NCName. Hm, that might
be a spec bug then.
Yes
Or in
1<<a>2</a>
as "<" and "<a>2</a>"
"<<" is longer, but not consistent.
"<<" is longer than "<", and there are continuations of "1<<" that
conform to the EBNF, so the LMP rule compels the tokenizer to pick
"<<", which leads to raising an error at ">". Ghislain also said this
yesterday.
It's unclear what you mean by "consistent". If you mean that having
the tokenizer pick "<<" is not consistent with parsing the string as:
Perhaps getting a consistent parsing tree?
Theoretically a parser could parse it right-to-left and see <a>2</a>
before <
Cheers,
Benito
On 04/28/2015 11:22 PM, Michael Dyck wrote:
On 15-04-28 05:17 PM, Michael Dyck wrote:
On 15-04-28 04:33 PM, Benito van der Zander wrote:
Hi Michael,
What if it parses it in
12!(12 div.)
as two tokens?
"." is a terminal symbol, and "div" is not a NCName there, just part
of a
MultiplicativeExpr.
As pointed out by Ghislain yesterday, the last paragraph of A.2.2
applies:
if a QName or NCName is followed by a "." or "-", the two tokens must be
separated by whitespace and/or Comments.
Oh, sorry, right, you're saying it's not an NCName. Hm, that might be
a spec bug then.
-Michael
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
