From: Brian I. <in...@tt...> - 2002-04-14 21:33:21
|
On 14/04/02 16:00 -0400, Clark C . Evans wrote: > On Sun, Apr 14, 2002 at 12:37:52PM -0700, Neil Watkiss wrote: > | > [094] nested_keyed_entry(n) ::= inline_leaf_node line_space * > | > keyed_entry_separator > | > value_node(>n) > | > | That would fix the problem, yup. > > Ok. Let's hang on to give Oren and Brian a chance to comment. > Given Steve's needs and our desire to keep things "relatively simple", > perhaps this is the best compromise. I'm in favor of keeping the syntax as is. But I will say that I was always under the impression that you could only use inline leaves with no explicit transfer. I thought we discussed this pretty heavily. --- quandry: - !foo bar: baz is it: - !foo bar:baz or: - !foo bar: baz ... Cheers, Brain |