Re: [Yaml-core] New draft.

[Clark C . E. <cc...@cl...>]

On Sun, Aug 12, 2001 at 10:57:29AM +0200, Oren Ben-Kiki wrote:
| OK, I hammered the new draft late into the night yesterday....

I spent a few minutes looking at it; I'll dedicate far more
time later. What I noticed:

  - Characters needs to be included in the information model

  - The character production needs to be fixed somewhat since
    Both #D and #A are allowed in the serialized format, some
    better way to denote the normalization should be given, 
    and then a note that characters in the information model
    that are not directly expressable via the char production
    must be escaped.

  - The unquoted scalar should be broken into two scalar types,
    those starting with alphabetic characters ("unquoted"), and 
    those that remain ("implicit").  Ideally this distinction 
    will be based on a character property of the unicode 
    specification.
   
    Currently, an alphabetic scalar is implicitly typed... which
    is not correct.  Types for alphabetic scalars must be 
    explicit, less we have a bag of worms.

  - I still don't quite understand the reference to reference
    mechanism. A bit of explanation would help.

  - The spec should state that implicit types will be dictated
    by the YAML spec or amendments to the YAML spec.  Implicit
    types should not be customizable as this will hurt 
    interoperability.

  - As for single quote strings...
 
    | if this:
    |     'isn't forbidden, then...'
    | is this:
    |     'a key' : or a scalar value?'

    Hmm.  tough one.  I can only think of one solution
    off hand... forbid the single quote scalar form 
    for keys (we already forbid the block form).  Also,
    I'd drop the terminating quote as any resonable 
    programmer would assume that intermediate quotes 
    would have to be escaped.

Very nice work Oren.  When I get a chunk of time...
(which might not be until the first sale of the
application I'm developing... mid September at the
very latest) I will go through the spec with a very
fine tooth comb.

Best,

Clark