[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [ddlm-group] Comments and folding within lists and tables
- To: Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <ddlm-group@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] Comments and folding within lists and tables
- From: Nick Spadaccini <nick@csse.uwa.edu.au>
- Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:46:24 +0800
- Authentication-Results: postfix;
- In-Reply-To: <4B22D170.3060603@niehs.nih.gov>
On 12/12/09 7:10 AM, "Joe Krahn" <krahn@niehs.nih.gov> wrote:
> COMMENTS:
>
> In the last draft, the section on delimiting "tokens" uses the term
> whitespace, but the list is described as "ASCII space separated data
> values".
>
> Do all blank-space delimiters allow the general definition of
> whitespace, including comments, or are there cases where comments are
> disallowed?
Hasn't been discussed within compound data stypes.
>
> If the defined whitespace is used in all cases, this would be a valid table:
>
> { #my table
> 'hello':world #testing
> } #end of table
I can see that this is perfectly acceptable.
> Also, the list and table initiator/terminator characters do not require
> whitespace around them. Do the 1st and 3rd comments above require
> preceding blank space as defined in STAR? Or, do the "implicit
> delimiter" characteristics of those characters make it optional?
In the last version of the draft paper I issued we made a clear distinction
in the requirement of whitespace between the end of one token and the
beginning of the next. {# is the beginning of one an the beginning of
another, and hence does not require a whitespace. This was the way we got
around the fact that }} was ok and did not need it to be } }.
>
> # [UN]FOLDING:
> The draft gives the TABLE example:
>
> { ...
> "description":"""Cubic space group
> and metric cell vectors"""}
>
> Then it says it implies line joining. Does this mean that the string for
> "description" is unwrapped to the one-line string "Cubic space group and
> metric cell vectors"?
NO. I can't recall the exact wording but the intent was that between the
parts of a table/list whitespace had no meaning, but within a token like """
it would retain its meaning.
Hence
{ ...
"description":"""Cubic space group
and metric cell vectors"""}
Is equivalent to the tag "description" having the value
"Cubic space group and\n metric cell vectors"
> To allow for longer strings without inserting a line break, it may be
> better to allow optional space around the colon, so the above example
> could be written as:
>
> { ...
> "description":
> "Cubic space group and metric cell vectors"
> }
>
> The exclusion of : from non-quoted strings prevents this from being
> ambiguous, so I don't see a good reason not to allow whitespace around
> the colon, or perhaps only following it.
The definition will be made to allow for the above, as well as
{ ...
"description"
:
"Cubic space group and metric cell vectors"
}
Again the whitespace between the parts of a compound data type are meant to
be meaningless.
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
ddlm-group@iucr.org
http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Are empty lists/tables valid?
- Next by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] CIF2 Syntax all wrapped up?
- Prev by thread: [ddlm-group] Comments and folding within lists and tables
- Next by thread: [ddlm-group] Are empty lists/tables valid?
- Index(es):