Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
On Sun, 2005-04-24 at 19:34 +0200, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
Alexey Melnikov writes:
Does anybody have any opinion in support or against this change?
It seems reasonable to forbid them now, but add a note to implementers
that a later extension may change this to allow them, and mention part
numbers as possible motivation.
well, there are currently no extensions using namespaces, so there's
nothing much to forbid.
I was about to mention that.
this mostly affects the BNF for the variable
reference syntax, and I don't think it's good to restrict the syntax,
and then turn around and say the syntax may be broken by extensions in
the future.
Exactly my point.
in that case we could just as well left namespaces out of
the specification altogether, IMHO.
here's the BNF I think we need to allow this syntax:
variable-ref = "${" [namespace] variable-name "}"
namespace = identifier "." *sub-namespace
sub-namespace = variable-name "."
variable-name = num-variable / identifier
num-variable = 1*DIGIT
this is the current BNF:
variable-ref = "${" *namespace variable-name "}"
namespace = identifier "."
variable-name = num-variable / identifier
num-variable = 1*DIGIT
Looks good to me.