Here is the email thread which discusses the actual example:

 https://lists.apache.org/thread/yd1zo73sjf49v2wqnqwh0dwzy26k0v4c

On Sat, Feb 17, 2024 at 5:25 AM Steve Hanson <smhdfdl@gmail.com> wrote:
Is the user who noticed this unable to create a schema to parse his data? IBM has supported EDIFACT for nearly ten years, and nobody has raised static extra escaped characters as a problem. So I'd be interested in seeing the motivating example please.  

On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 9:53 PM Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle@apache.org> wrote:
A user has noticed that for DFDL escape schemes based on escape characters, the properties dfdl:escapeCharacter and dfdl:escapeEscapeCharacter can both be runtime-valued expressions, but not dfdl:extraEscapedCharacters.

This is not consistent. A major motivation for having these properties be runtime expressions is EDI formats, and the example motivating the need for dfdl:extraEscapedCharacters to be an expression also comes from EDIFACT.

See this Daffodil ticket with a link to the email thread discussing this:

Mike Beckerle 
Apache Daffodil PMC | daffodil.apache.org
OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | www.ogf.org/ogf/doku.php/standards/dfdl/dfdl
Owl Cyber Defense | www.owlcyberdefense.com


--
  dfdl-wg mailing list
  dfdl-wg@lists.ogf.org
  https://lists.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg
--
  dfdl-wg mailing list
  dfdl-wg@lists.ogf.org
  https://lists.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg