Details

    • Type: Bug
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Minor
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: ODF 1.2
    • Component/s: OpenFormula
    • Labels:
      None
    • Proposal:
      Hide

      Add Whitespace rules to EBNFs of section 5 Expression Syntax.

      Show
      Add Whitespace rules to EBNFs of section 5 Expression Syntax.
    • Resolution:
      Hide

      Added Whitespace to
      5.2 Basic Expressions: Expression
      5.6 Functions and Function Parameters: EmptyOrParameter
      5.9 Reference List: ReferenceList
      5.10.5 Automatic Intersection: AutomaticIntersection
      5.14 Whitespace: Whitespace

      Show
      Added Whitespace to 5.2 Basic Expressions: Expression 5.6 Functions and Function Parameters: EmptyOrParameter 5.9 Reference List: ReferenceList 5.10.5 Automatic Intersection: AutomaticIntersection 5.14 Whitespace: Whitespace

      Description

      Copied from office-comment list

      Original author: "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>
      Original date: 18 May 2008 06:02:54 -0000
      Original URL: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200805/msg00028.html

        Attachments

          Activity

          Hide
          rcweir Robert Weir (Inactive) added a comment -

          per 1/12/09 TC call: Delegated to Formula SC

          Show
          rcweir Robert Weir (Inactive) added a comment - per 1/12/09 TC call: Delegated to Formula SC
          Hide
          orcmid Dennis Hamilton (Inactive) added a comment -

          CommentsRegistry-v18 #190

          Show
          orcmid Dennis Hamilton (Inactive) added a comment - CommentsRegistry-v18 #190
          Hide
          rcweir Robert Weir (Inactive) added a comment -

          I think that most of these issues raised by Dennis are already fixed in the latest draft. However, on reading this section I wonder if it is necessary at all. Shouldn't all restrictions on whitespace already be in the BNF? If so, it is dangerous to restate this same information in a potentially contradictory fashion in prose.

          Show
          rcweir Robert Weir (Inactive) added a comment - I think that most of these issues raised by Dennis are already fixed in the latest draft. However, on reading this section I wonder if it is necessary at all. Shouldn't all restrictions on whitespace already be in the BNF? If so, it is dangerous to restate this same information in a potentially contradictory fashion in prose.
          Hide
          rcweir Robert Weir (Inactive) added a comment -

          To the extent possible, we should define whitespace processing rules in the BNF, rather than as the current prose description. In other words, define a WHITESPACE character class and indicate where zero or more whitespace characters are permitted.

          Show
          rcweir Robert Weir (Inactive) added a comment - To the extent possible, we should define whitespace processing rules in the BNF, rather than as the current prose description. In other words, define a WHITESPACE character class and indicate where zero or more whitespace characters are permitted.
          Hide
          orcmid Dennis Hamilton (Inactive) added a comment -

          PROPOSE-DISCUSS

          I agree with this recommendation and the analysis about changes in the current working draft of OpenFormula.

          It will be important to say something about the preservation of white space as it occurs in the formula when presented for human inspection, since the layout may be an important aspect for human understanding and review/modification of the formula. Not sure how we express this.

          I also think we still need to come at the layers.

          It appears that we are specifying a reference syntax anchored squarely in Unicode code points. The limitations on what of such code points can actually arise in a concrete encoding and what can be preserved when saved in a concrete encoding is an interesting one that we must acknowledge somehow. Likewise, some concrete encodings have their own rules for treating white space before it will be seen at the OpenFormula level. (They may have escape mechanisms for forcing white space delivery, too.)

          Show
          orcmid Dennis Hamilton (Inactive) added a comment - PROPOSE-DISCUSS I agree with this recommendation and the analysis about changes in the current working draft of OpenFormula. It will be important to say something about the preservation of white space as it occurs in the formula when presented for human inspection, since the layout may be an important aspect for human understanding and review/modification of the formula. Not sure how we express this. I also think we still need to come at the layers. It appears that we are specifying a reference syntax anchored squarely in Unicode code points. The limitations on what of such code points can actually arise in a concrete encoding and what can be preserved when saved in a concrete encoding is an interesting one that we must acknowledge somehow. Likewise, some concrete encodings have their own rules for treating white space before it will be seen at the OpenFormula level. (They may have escape mechanisms for forcing white space delivery, too.)
          Hide
          erack Eike Rathke (Inactive) added a comment -

          @Dennis:
          I don't see how text encodings would be related to this. The spec talks in Unicode code points. How the characters are transported in various text encodings is beyond the scope of the spec. Anyway, we agreed on the 4 white space characters Space/Tab/CarriageReturn/LineFeed to be understood and preserved. Any Unicode capable encoding is suitable for those.

          About preservation: 5.14 Whitespace already says:
          "Applications should retain whitespace entered by the original formula creator and use it when saving or presenting the formula"

          Show
          erack Eike Rathke (Inactive) added a comment - @Dennis: I don't see how text encodings would be related to this. The spec talks in Unicode code points. How the characters are transported in various text encodings is beyond the scope of the spec. Anyway, we agreed on the 4 white space characters Space/Tab/CarriageReturn/LineFeed to be understood and preserved. Any Unicode capable encoding is suitable for those. About preservation: 5.14 Whitespace already says: "Applications should retain whitespace entered by the original formula creator and use it when saving or presenting the formula"
          Show
          erack Eike Rathke (Inactive) added a comment - Change in https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/34847/OpenDocument-formula-20091026.odt

            People

            • Assignee:
              rcweir Robert Weir (Inactive)
              Reporter:
              rcweir Robert Weir (Inactive)
            • Watchers:
              0 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: