[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
--
T +61 (02) 9717 9907
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [ddlm-group] Summary of proposed CIF syntax changes
- To: Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <ddlm-group@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] Summary of proposed CIF syntax changes
- From: James Hester <jamesrhester@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 13:13:03 +1100
- In-Reply-To: <4B199126.3010002@niehs.nih.gov>
- References: <20091204093823.GA10999@emerald.iucr.org><4B199126.3010002@niehs.nih.gov>
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Joe Krahn <krahn@niehs.nih.gov> wrote:
That is, they cannot contain embedded triple quotes/embedded newline-semicolons.
Yes, we were looking for a concise expression that encompassed the following cases:
1. [[1 2 3][4 5 6]] is allowed and is equivalent to [ [ 1 2 3 ] [ 4 5 6 ] ]
2. [abc[1 2 3]qef] is allowed and is equivalent to [ abc [ 1 2 3 ] qef ]
3. [ "abc""qef" ] is not allowed
Perhaps someone can suggest a better formulation?
The plan was to disallow it for simplicity, although the parsing would be unambiguous even if whitespace were present
No restrictions on length, multiple lines possible, case sensitive matching. Requirement of quotes for simplicity - should we drop this?
Semicolon and triple-quote strings do not emphasize that they cannot
contain embedded close-quotes, as done for single quotes.
That is, they cannot contain embedded triple quotes/embedded newline-semicolons.
In change 9, this sentence is hard to understand: "That does NOT require
that whitespace is necessary between the beginning of one token and the
beginning of the next token...". the main problem is that "token" is not
defined. I the example "[[1 2 3] [4 5 6]]" does each inner list count as
a token when parsing the outer list, and the initial '[' does not? Maybe
describe it as: whitespace is required between all values within a list
or table, but not between the values and the begin/end token.
Was it decided that "[[1 2 3][4 5 6]]" is not allowed?
Yes, we were looking for a concise expression that encompassed the following cases:
1. [[1 2 3][4 5 6]] is allowed and is equivalent to [ [ 1 2 3 ] [ 4 5 6 ] ]
2. [abc[1 2 3]qef] is allowed and is equivalent to [ abc [ 1 2 3 ] qef ]
3. [ "abc""qef" ] is not allowed
Perhaps someone can suggest a better formulation?
It is not clear whether white space is allowed adjacent to the
associative colon.
The plan was to disallow it for simplicity, although the parsing would be unambiguous even if whitespace were present
Why does the associative index require quotes? Are there any
restrictions on the string index such as maximum length, or whether it
can contain multiple lines? Is matching case sensitive?
No restrictions on length, multiple lines possible, case sensitive matching. Requirement of quotes for simplicity - should we drop this?
Also, the "smart quotes" in the PDF should be fixed to be normal ASCII.
Joe
_______________________________________________
ddlm-group mailing list
ddlm-group@iucr.org
http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
--
T +61 (02) 9717 9907
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148
_______________________________________________ ddlm-group mailing list ddlm-group@iucr.org http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ddlm-group] Summary of proposed CIF syntax changes (Nick Spadaccini)
- References:
- [ddlm-group] Summary of proposed CIF syntax changes (Brian McMahon)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Summary of proposed CIF syntax changes (Joe Krahn)
- Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Elide close quotes by doubling?
- Next by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] List/table recursion limits?
- Prev by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Summary of proposed CIF syntax changes
- Next by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Summary of proposed CIF syntax changes
- Index(es):