Hi Mike We decided a long time ago that scanning was ended by in-scope separator, in-scope terminator, end of known-length parent or end of data, and not initiator. I think the rationale was that it would slow the scanning considerably especially with models with optional elements; it complicates an implementation which must be aware of all the possible next elements, and neither IBM TX or IBM MRM had the capability. There are some use cases like RTF where it would be useful, but these can be handled using lengthKind 'pattern'. We can discuss on the call today whether this needs clarifying in the spec, but the rules are clearly stated in section 12.3.2. Regards Steve Hanson Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL) Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group IBM SWG, Hursley, UK smh@uk.ibm.com tel:+44-1962-815848 From: Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com> To: dfdl-wg@ogf.org Date: 16/07/2012 21:08 Subject: [DFDL-WG] can an initiator be terminating markup? Sent by: dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org Did we do a clarification about this? That is, when parsing for delimiters, do you scan for a subsequent fields initiator? I.e., can a subsequent field's initiator behave as terminating markup for a prior field? I somehow think we decide the answer to this is no, but didn't find discussion of it or rationale. -- Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair Tel: 781-330-0412 -- 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