Andrew Patterson wrote: > The grammar (pasted in the spec) for the use_node > slot refers to object_path which is not actually > defined in the path grammar. Furthermore, I can't > actually tell from the spec whether use_node > is restricted to absolute paths, or whether it can > also accept relative paths. >
this should be 'absolute_path', which is in the path syntax section. Must be a typo that slipped by some time ago... I have corrected it now in the ADL 1.5 draft. > archetype_internal_ref: > SYM_USE_NODE type_identifier c_occurrences object_path > > So obviously the grammar needs to be updated to > use the right path rule, but I am also thinking that > perhaps the use_node section needs some > explanation of what types of paths are allowed > to be used and what the ramifications are > if relative paths are also acceptable. > only absolute paths are allowed (so far; I think anything else will be too complicated and I don't see any strong need) - thomas beale
