R. Bastian:

> CONTEXT_SOURCE ::= PREAMBLE "\starttext" TEXT "\stoptext" | CONTEXT_SOURCE
>>>  TEXT ::= STARTSTOPS | SETUPS | DEFINES | OTHERS [ TEXT
>>
>> luigi:

>   To be general, i think
>>   MY_CONTEXT_SOURCE ::= MACRO* END
>>
>
R. Bastian:

> I dont understand the sense of "\end\starttext"

sense==semantic

"\end""\starttext" is a valid string for a hypothetical  bnf grammar of
ContTeXt
which is not valid for your bnf ;
"\end""\starttext""\stoptext" is in your bnf grammar
and has the same semantic of  "\end""\starttext" .

The point is : a bnf for Context can be hard to define


 luigi:

think that a bnf or lpeg grammar is really useful for a sort of
>> standard-ConTeXt
>> or minimal-ConTeXt or light-ConTeXt
>> ie a ConTeXt to use as "reference"
>>
>
R. Bastian:

> Exactly what I need : standard, minimal and light
>

Exactly what can be hard to define and capture in a bnf .

wolfgang

>
> How could a BNF grammar help to learn ConTeXt,

a bnf can help to build a syntax checker, a highlighter etc.
Actually the only way to say that you have a valid ConTeXt string
is running context on that string .

The semantic is another story.

-- 
luigi
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Reply via email to