[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ddlm-group] A modest addition to the DDLm spec. .. .. .

On Thursday, September 30, 2010 3:02 PM, Herbert J. Bernstein wrote:

>The confusion arises from the original CIF 1.1 document which
>first discusses the allow whitespace characters, and then the
>syntax token <WhiteSpace>.

Ah.  Thank you, that makes sense now.

>  We should clarify it, but we
>should clarify the role of whitespace both for CIF1 and CIF2,
>not just in the CIF2 change document.

I'm not clear on what would be needed here, but on general principles I am in favor of clarifying the spec(s).

>In any case, it appears that what we have so far _does_ permit
>comments within bracketed constructs.

I agree, and that suits me fine.

Best regards,

John C. Bollinger, Ph.D.
Department of Structural Biology
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital

Email Disclaimer:  www.stjude.org/emaildisclaimer

ddlm-group mailing list

Reply to: [list | sender only]