Re: Motion 46: NO
On 2013-07-19 17:36:38 -0500, Ralph Baker Kearfott wrote:
> On 07/19/2013 02:00 PM, Ian McIntosh wrote:
> >Since there are conflicts between common languages it's impossible to
> >define one literal syntax common to them all, and using "_" for a 1788
> >meaning when it already has two meanings for common language literals may
> >cause additional confusion. If we use it, we might need a statement that
> >our meaning overrides any language meanings.
>
> I think that's a good point (about meaning conflicts). I'm
> wondering if we can word the standard in such a way
> to avoid such conflicts (by specifying, say, the locale's
> expression to express the three most significant
> decimal digits). The downside to that, of course, would
> be a less clear and weaker standard. I'll duck out of
> that one ...
For text2interval(), there can be no conflicts, assuming the
characters used in the specification are part of the character set.
But some choices may be better than others if you consider that
such literals can be part of a text stream. Of course, you can't
avoid all possible conflicts.
Requiring that all interval literals start with "[" and end with
the first "]" can help...
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)