> Didn't you read the article I shared? I read also the article “Don’t Use ISO/IEC 14977 Extended Backus-Naur Form (EBNF)” by David A. Wheeler. Some possibilities were pointed out as desirable improvements. > I actually wrote up the EBNF (ISO/IEC 14977) that was a good pazzle, > but just a toy. I hope that this contribution can help to become more productive in the discussed application domain. https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/2/27/72 https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1200987/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/158278836196.14966.3881489301852781521.stgit@devnote2/ > I found no one use it to define their data format, according to the article, > including ISO itself (lol!) and there are many local extension, > including W3C EBNF, and those say "I'm EBNF". I suggest to reconsider the current situation. > Well, to say the least, I feel it is quite confused. Such a view is reasonable. > So, if you are interested in it, I don't stop you to write it up. Will the collaboration continue anyhow? > I just keep away from it. This is a pity. Will the clarification become more constructive for remaining challenges? Regards, Markus
