All,
As I am writing tools that parse OSGi metadata I've run across a
minor issue that bothers me.
From the 4.1 version of the Core Specification, Section 3.2.1.12
gives the example Bundle-NativeCode:
/lib/http.DLL; osname = QNX; osversion = 3.1
According to 3.2.3 Common Header Syntax:
header ::= clause ( ',' clause ) *
clause ::= ( ';' path ) * ( ';' parameter ) *
Thus the "osversion = 3.1" is a parameter.
According to 1.3.2 General Syntax Definitions
parameter ::= directive | attribute
attribute ::= token '=' argument
Thus "osversion = 3.1" is an attribute, and 3.1 is the argument.
Also according to 1.3.2 General Syntax Definitions
argument ::= token | quoted-string
The argument 3.1 is not a quoted string, thus it is a token, which is
token ::= ( alphanum | '_' | '-' )+
alphanum ::= alpha | digit
alpha ::= [a..zA..Z]
digit ::= [0..9]
Well, 3.1 contains a period/dot, which is *not* a valid token character.
Shouldn't the 3.1 be in quotes, as in
/lib/http.DLL; osname = QNX; osversion = "3.1"
Am I missing something? How rigorous or forgiving should a header
parser be? How rigorous is OSGi metadata in practice?
/djk
_______________________________________________
OSGi Developer Mail List
[email protected]
http://www2.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
