On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:48:40 +0200 luigi scarso <luigi.sca...@gmail.com> scribit:
> 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. OK - but isn't it not worth to try it ? > > -- > 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 ___________________________________________________________________________________
