ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: draft-farrel-rtg-common-bnf (Reduced Backus-Naur Form(RBNF) A Syntax Used in Various Protocol Specification toProposed Standard

2009-02-06 21:00:56
Going back to RFC 2205,

      These rules are specified using Backus-Naur Form (BNF) augmented
      with square brackets surrounding optional sub-sequences.

What do you think of BNFO, for "Backus-Naur Form with Options"?

or BNFB, for "Backus-Naur Form with Brackets"?

        Tony Hansen
        tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com

John C Klensin wrote:

--On Friday, February 06, 2009 13:55 +0100 "Tom.Petch"
<sisyphus(_at_)dial(_dot_)pipex(_dot_)com> wrote:

...
I think too that there is a third issue, of a better name than
RBNF.  John clearly showed that this I-D is not reduced.
Historic? Deprecated? Limited_applicability? Variant?
Simplified?

"simplified" has the same problem as "reduced", unless one
argues that one simplifies a metalanguage by adding more
operators.  "Variant" would work for me, and this actually is
much more of a variation on classic BNF (or ISO Extended BNF)
than ABNF is.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>