(j3.2006) 007 formatting

Malcolm Cohen malcolm
Wed Mar 7 21:35:30 EST 2007

Van Snyder said:
> The attachment 07-007-p61.ps is another one,

That is a great improvement.  The paragraph numbers look fine.

I still don't much like the combination with line numbers,
but this version is better.

> Do we want paragraph numbers on constraints?

I don't think so.  They should be the same as BNF rules.

As for referencing them in edits etc.,
using the notation [61:R436] and [61:C439] would be fine.
(And with the obvious [61:C439+1] to specify the second line
if relevant, exactly as precise as using line numbers.)

> There are only five
> references to constraints by number.  If we went back to just
> "Constraint" we wouldn't have to worry about what to do about Clause 4
> having more than 100 constraints.

I tend to see that as being a defect anyway.

For example, the components have their own constraints vis-a-vis
attributes, which duplicates and sits uneasily with the separate
definition of what the attributes actually mean in c05.  I've been
meaning to find time to turn the c04 attribute stuff into straightforward
"gives X the Y attribute" and simply deleting the excess constraints.
(At least some of these are already duplicative.)

So I prefer the 07-007-p61.ps version.

........................Malcolm Cohen (malcolm at nag-j.co.jp), Nihon NAG, Tokyo.

More information about the J3 mailing list