oiic-formation-discuss message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Open formula group, and getting ahead ofourselves?
- From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com
- To: oiic-formation-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 10:02:48 -0400
"Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
wrote on 06/22/2008 04:31:32 AM:
> Just had a quick look at the latest open formula group output.
>
> For many of the functions I see such as:
> Syntax: MIDB( Text T ; BytePosition Start ; ByteLength Length )
>
> The pseudotypes ByteLength and BytePosition are Integers, but their
> exact meanings and values are not further defined by this
> specification.
>
> I.e. for (some part) of the spec a function is defined and each term
> of the function is refined. Not exactly a formal grammar, but nodding
> in that direction.
>
> If there's anyone on this group also on the formula group, how
> might we suggest they consider testability for their syntax statements?
>
You can send comments on the OpenFormula draft to
the ODF public comment list. I know that David Wheeler, chair of
that subcommittee, monitors that list.
An overall to-do item for ODF 1.2 is to express on
syntax formally in EBNF form. This should be testable, though it
would require some custom coding. For example, a SAX parser that
catches all spreadsheet formula attributes and then passes the formulas
to a syntax checker, perhaps based on lex/yacc to ensure it matches the
EBNF productions.
-Rob
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]