[DFDL-WG] can an initiator be terminating markup?

[Steve Hanson]

Hi Mike

We decided a long time ago that scanning was ended by in-scope separator, 
in-scope terminator, end of known-length parent or end of data, and not 
initiator.  I think the rationale was that it would slow the scanning 
considerably especially with models with optional elements; it complicates 
an implementation which must be aware of all the possible next elements, 
and neither IBM TX or IBM MRM had the capability.  There are some use 
cases like RTF where it would be useful, but these can be handled using 
lengthKind 'pattern'.  We can discuss on the call today whether this needs 
clarifying in the spec, but the rules are clearly stated in section 
12.3.2.

Regards

Steve Hanson
Architect, Data Format Description Language (DFDL)
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
IBM SWG, Hursley, UK
smh at uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848



From:   Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl at gmail.com>
To:     dfdl-wg at ogf.org
Date:   16/07/2012 21:08
Subject:        [DFDL-WG] can an initiator be terminating markup?
Sent by:        dfdl-wg-bounces at ogf.org



Did we do a clarification about this?

That is, when parsing for delimiters, do you scan for a subsequent fields 
initiator? I.e., can a subsequent field's initiator behave as terminating 
markup for a prior field?

I somehow think we decide the answer to this is no, but didn't find 
discussion of it or rationale.

-- 
Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair 
Tel:  781-330-0412
--
  dfdl-wg mailing list
  dfdl-wg at ogf.org
  https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/dfdl-wg/attachments/20120717/2d06cd94/attachment.html>