Subject: SDL-News: SDL Keywords, Lexical rules
Date: Thu Apr 24 1997 - 16:25:00 GMT
The originator of this message is responsible for its content.
-----From Rick Reed TSE <rickreed#tseng.co.uk> to sdlnews -----
I have received a personal communication complaining that the keywords for
SDL (such as call, connect and error etc.) are names that are frequently
needed the SDL definition itself - especially when this is for telecomms.
For example, in draft Recommendation Q.1228, INAP for IN Capability Set
2, connect and error are legitimate signals. In the SDLs of Annex
A/Q.1228 they have been spelt 'errror' and 'connnect" to avoid
problems! This then makes importation of the associated ASN.1 from the
parent Recommendation messy, to say the least.
Also the lexical rules of Z.100 are not completely implemented in some
tools, which inhibits the portability of both SDL/GR and SDL/PR even with
Moreover, there are problems interfacing SDL with other languages (at lower
and higher levels) where these are case sensitive or have different rules
Lastly, in in Z.100 and in other publications on SDL, the keywords are
often distinguished by a different font (usually bold).
Given this background, I suggest that the lexical rules for SDL are
reconsidered. However, there MUST be some compatibility provided (in some
way) with existing SDL that is machine readable.
There are obviously many possible approaches (such as visually distinct
fonts for keywords), but before refining the requirements and strating the
study, the level of user support should be established.
More views please.
Rick Reed, TSE Limited
13 Weston House, 18-22 Church Street
Lutterworth Leicestershire LE17 4AW United Kingdom
Tel +44 14 55 55 96 55; Fax +44 14 55 55 96 58
-----End text from Rick Reed TSE <rickreed#tseng.co.uk> to sdlnews -----
For help, email "majordomo#sdl-forum.org" with the body of your email as:
or (iff this does not answer your question) email: owner-sdlnews#sdl-forum.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a23 : Sun Jun 16 2013 - 10:41:39 GMT