Editorial: Clarify document grammar rules #840
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
bbfa12c to
8429069
Compare
Factored out of #777. Clarifies when type definition & extension can and cannot be included in executable documents To do this more clearly, this introduces a number of new grammar rules. This does not change the actual behavior of a parser (all existing docs are parsed equivalently, no new docs are legal). However instead of using language that manipulates existing rules this can just reference those already restricted. Hopefully this actually is useful for implementations which seek to offer clear subsets for each use case.
8429069 to
ba734b6
Compare
benjie
approved these changes
Apr 8, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Factored out of #777. Clarifies when type definition & extension can and cannot be included in executable documents
To do this more clearly, this introduces a number of new grammar rules. This does not change the actual behavior of a parser (all existing docs are parsed equivalently, no new docs are legal). However instead of using language that manipulates existing rules this can just reference those already restricted.
Hopefully this actually is useful for implementations which seek to offer clear subsets for each use case.