On the face of it, yes it does seem inconsistent. The point being that
"%WSP*;" is the same as "%ES; %WSP+;" (on parsing, longest match is taken;
on unparsing nothing is output).
In our NACHA xsds we have:
But strictly speaking it should be this because it's an optional new line
that appears rather than any white space:
If we allow ES then ES on its own as the only string literal in the list
should be an error.
Regards
Steve Hanson
Architect, IBM DFDL
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh@uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848
From: Mike Beckerle
To: "dfdl-wg@ogf.org" ,
Date: 26/06/2014 18:17
Subject: [DFDL-WG] ES in delimiters
Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org
Steve Lawrence from the Daffodil project has observed that we're not
particularly consistent about delimiters and the %ES; entity.
We allow WSP* with caveat that you can't have initiatedContent, but we
disallow ES.
There is a use case for optional delimiters e.g.,
initator="%CR;%LF; %ES;"
meaning absorb and discard an optional CRLF.
Without %ES we end up having to model this syntax as an optional hidden
element.
Thoughts?
...mikeb
Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology |
www.tresys.com
Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions are
subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy
--
dfdl-wg mailing list
dfdl-wg@ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
