Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of abnf-discuss-bounces@ietf.org designates 2001:1890:126c::1:1e as permitted sender) client-ip=2001:1890:126c::1:1e;
Message-ID: <50E45623.9060607@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 07:45:39 -0800
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@gmail.com>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
	rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
References: <50DCD850.3020106@alum.mit.edu>
	<alpine.LSU.2.00.1301021022570.15409@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1301021022570.15409@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
Cc: abnf-discuss@ietf.org, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [abnf-discuss] Some thoughts about how to make ABNF more
 convenient to use
Precedence: list
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: abnf-discuss-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: abnf-discuss-bounces@ietf.org


On 1/2/2013 2:29 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
> xml2rfc understands <artwork type="abnf"> - see section 6.2 of its README.
> It performs ABNF syntax checks and colourizing, but I don't think it
> checks for undefined rule names (though I haven't tried it recently).


It would need to be able to distinguish among potentially independent 
sets of rules, within a spec. We don't currently have a way to indicate 
that.  That is, a spec might provide for more than one parser, and there 
needs to be a way to label the rules for each, so they can be 
distinguished.

To keep simple cases of abnf simple, that added labeling would need to 
be optional.  A form such as <ruleset>.<rulename> seems obvious. (If the 
debate is about the separator character, then we've agreed to the 
construct...

Also, I like the idea of having a formal construct to 'import' rulesets. 
  I think this needs a way of labeling the set and declaring its being 
imported.

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
abnf-discuss mailing list
abnf-discuss@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abnf-discuss