> Exactly. There is more. A formal language notation is > like a formula, its rights extend beyond the document itself. > > I only want to control the notation specification. Macromedia, > BlueDragon and others can write compilers that implement the > language. But, because the CFL abstract notation is a formal > notation it or a form of it must be part of any compiler to > implement the language, compiler writers would have to have > rights to the notation.
Unfortunately for you I suppose, your attempt to do this would be doomed to utter failure. As soon as Macromedia and/or New Atlanta released a new version of their product, with new tags and functions, your notation would need to be revised to reflect those changes. For your notation to have any value, CFML implementations would need to conform to it, but because you have no control over the implementers they wouldn't. Formal language notations are only valuable to compiler writers, as far as I can tell, so writing a notation after the language exists is kind of a Bizarro World approach. In addition, if you attempted to force either company to abide by your notation, you'd be crushed like a bug in court. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information! ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (www.cfxhosting.com). CFCDev is supported by New Atlanta, makers of BlueDragon http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/index.cfm An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
