On Mon, 2022-04-25 at 11:32 +0100, Geoff Clare via austin-group-l at The Open Group wrote: > > Do you think that similar explanations would be needed for the > > other > > expansions/substitutions? > > I searched all of XCU chapter 2 for the word "character" when I > worked > on my proposed changes for bugs 1560, 1561, 1562 and 1564, and I > believe > the proposed changes cover all of the places that need changing.
Great... thanks for your efforts. > > > For (3c): "Non-zero-length IFS white space shall delimit a field." > > > > 0-n would IMO be ok, as it specifically says "non-zero-length" ... > > which might be obsolete with your change. > > > > > > So I think, that it needs to stay "zero or more"... or "any" needs > > to > > be clarified... or the text for (3b) changed somehow. > > I should have looked at the whole text - I was thinking about the > definition of IFS white space in isolation, and having an empty > string > be IFS white space seemed odd to me, but it is clear from this use of > "Non-zero-length IFS white space shall ..." that this was intentional > for whatever reason, so it would be best not to mess with it. Well you're not so wrong with that... having the empty string defined as IFS white space is indeed a bit odd. Perhaps it would be better to reword the bullet items as necessary... and look out for other occurrences of "IFS white space" that might refer to that "definition"? > I'll edit the note to change it back to "zero". But that's also good enough for me. In the current state, I think the proposal is fine. Thanks, Chris.
