From: Brian I. <in...@tt...> - 2001-11-13 19:35:07
|
On 13/11/01 18:52 +0200, Oren Ben-Kiki wrote: > Clark C . Evans wrote: > > - A folded scalar has a '\<eol>' or '\<space>' indicator. The latter is > optional if the scalar starts with something reasonable (not a \, not an > indicator, not a space, etc.). > > So: \ this starts with a space > And: \ \this starts with a '\'. > While: this is what you'd expect. > Note: \ *all* are implicitly typed. > Otherwise we didn't save a style (IMHO). Don't like it. Don't want to put any weight on whitespace. And It's ugly IMO. > This brings us back to 4 styles. It also provides a nice way to handle > in-line folded starting with line noise. Of course if we do that there > wouldn't be no good reason not to allow it for blocks too (at this point > Brian says 'ouch', I expect - but what's the harm? besides we could not to > if you really feel bad about it). Ouch! I'd really like to stick to the exact syntax and semantics. The wording is completely up to you. Take it as a challenge :) FWIW, I have no problem with 5 scalar types and 500 productions. > So, Brian's work is required on the references, Clark's 2.1 section is > needed for the info model, and I need your thoughts on my 3-styles scalar > format proposal above... What exactly is left to do on the references. You lost me here. I thought we were all set. Cheers, Brian |