[sc34wg3] CTM: Mergemap directive and semicolons

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Lars Heuer
>
> Using semicolons after each directive solves the problem but it looks
> ugly (version directive: %version 1.0; ).

I could certainly live without the semicolons, but on the other hand I  
think the visual impact is not too big.

> After taking a shower and thinking about it a bit I wondered if it
> wouldn't be better to make the "notation" mandatory for the mergemap
> directive: If the directive is changed from
>
>    mergemap ::= '%mergemap' IRI IRI? ';'
>
> to
>    mergemap ::= '%mergemap' IRI IRI
>
> the parser can always decide when the directive was parsed completely
> and we wouldn't bother the users to add semicolons everywhere.
>
> What do you think?

I think it's not very user-friendly to require the users to remember  
and type the entire PSI for the CTM syntax every time they use  
%mergemap.

Should we allow the use of a QName here? That would make it easier to  
refer to XTM etc files, too.

I think if we add semicolons after associations and outside-topic- 
block-template-invocations (OTBTIs?) it's going to be difficult to  
argue that we shouldn't have them after directives. After all, the  
same arguments are going to apply just as well to directives.

I guess my proposal is:
  - allow QNames,
  - leave the semicolons where they are, and
  - don't require the syntax identifier.

--Lars M.
http://www.garshol.priv.no/blog/
http://www.garshol.priv.no/tmphoto/