[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Uncertainties in EBNF Notation
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Uncertainties in EBNF Notation
- From: cbmvax!uunet!m2xenix!onion!tessi!loop!dont (Don Taylor)
- Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 18:37:28 PDT
- Cc: dont
I sent this to lojbab and he suggested I post it here.
I just received the ju'i lobypli mailing with the lojban machine grammar in
ebnf notation. It seems that the notation is ambiguous in that no precedence
is specified for the notation. For example
etc. Many of the other ebnf operators are open to the same interpretation.
I would greatly appreciate a more precise definition of precedence, and
associativity if relevant.
Item 10, "// encloses an elidable terminator, which may be omitted (without
change of meaning) if no grammatical ambiguity results" disturbs me. Reading
bnf as a definition of a language, which I take as the definition of what
is grammatical and what is not, leaves me uncertain of how to interpret the