RE: sub-string hotspotting, for final approval

["Galt, Stuart A" <stuart.a.galt@boeing.com>]

Lofton,

Looks good but I think we should change <substring object> slightly to:

<substring object> ::= 
        <BEGIN APPLICATION STRUCTURE> 
        <application structure descriptor> 
        <BEGIN APPLICATION STRUCTURE BODY>
        <simple substring> +                     <---- this should be
repeatable
        <END APPLICATION STRUCTURE>

But other than that it looks good to me.

Stuart.
--
Stuart Galt
SGML Resource Group
stuart.a.galt@boeing.com
(206) 544-3656

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 3:45 PM
> To: Galt, Stuart A
> Cc: cgmo-webcgm@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: sub-string hotspotting, for final approval
> 
> It turned out to be a little messier than we thought, but 
> here is the final take (hopefully).  Stuart, please check 
> that it says what we intended.
> 
> FYI, the messiness arose because of the recursion around the 
> <spanned text> element -- conceptually, it makes the 
> definition of sub-string APS impossible to achieve.  And also 
> our original take had overlooked to allow the definition of 
> an APS around an interior sub-string (doh!).
> 
> This replaces the recursion with an equivalent non-recursion one, and
> (nicely) the flattened EBNF is identical to the flattened 
> EBNF of the original CGM:1999 in the case of no sub-string APS.
> 
> I will send this to Dick Puk in the morning, if no one sees 
> any errors.
> 
> -Lofton.
>