[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [ddlm-group] THREAD 3: The alphabet of non-delimited strings.
- To: Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] THREAD 3: The alphabet of non-delimited strings.
- From: Nick Spadaccini <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:09:41 +0800
- Authentication-Results: postfix;
- In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 12/10/09 11:33 PM, "James Hester" <email@example.com> wrote: > (Prepared before Nick's latest emails) > > Point of clarification: when I stated that tokens would always be > separated by whitespace, I did not have in mind the contents of > bracketed constructs; for the purposes of this discussion I consider > that the whole bracketed construct is a single token (which is > obviously a simplification). I'm not sure in which sense Brian > understood this condition. So to answer Herbert's question: > > 2. When writing any quoted construct, we would always follow > the tailing quote with whitespace. > > Thus in writing a bracketed series of quoted strings, we would > follow each trailing quote with a space before the comma or > close bracket, but on read would accept a comma coming > immediately after the close quote. > > Is that correct? > > No: I had in mind that spaces would have to follow quoted constructs > only for quoted constructs outside brackets. Inside brackets, a comma > or close bracket could also directly follow quoted constructs (and > unquoted constructs). Incidentally, I don't understand the need to > distinguish between reading and writing. This is the point I have been making the whole time. The trailing space is unnecessary, but if you insist on it, then what Herb has said is correct. Unless you create a second production rule or grammar rule for exactly the same thing, but for when it is in a compound or not. By eliminating the demand for a trailing whitespace you have only ONE rule per object irrespective of whether it is in a compound or not. I think we have agreed that in the specification the token is all that is necessary, and there is no insistence on whitespace (not withstanding that writers are expected to pad). cheers Nick -------------------------------- Associate Professor N. Spadaccini, PhD School of Computer Science & Software Engineering The University of Western Australia t: +61 (0)8 6488 3452 35 Stirling Highway f: +61 (0)8 6488 1089 CRAWLEY, Perth, WA 6009 AUSTRALIA w3: www.csse.uwa.edu.au/~nick MBDP M002 CRICOS Provider Code: 00126G e: Nick.Spadaccini@uwa.edu.au _______________________________________________ ddlm-group mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] THREAD 3: The alphabet of non-delimited strings.
- Next by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] [THREAD 4] UTF8
- Prev by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] THREAD 3: The alphabet of non-delimited strings.
- Next by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] THREAD 3: The alphabet of non-delimited strings.