Uploaded image for project: 'FHIR Specification Feedback'
  1. FHIR Specification Feedback
  2. FHIR-27222

grammar vs spec who is leading?

    XMLWordPrintableJSON

Details

    • Icon: Change Request Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive
    • Icon: High High
    • Shorthand (FHIR)
    • 0.12.0 [deprecated]
    • FHIR Infrastructure
    • Language Reference
    • 3.1
    • Hide

      We will clarify that, in the case that there is a discrepancy between the grammar and what is written in the language reference, the language reference is considered correct until the discrepancy is clarified and addressed.  I think this makes sense because the language reference is more specific than the grammar.  The grammar is looser than the language reference since many things are enforced in the parser, not the grammar.

      Show
      We will clarify that, in the case that there is a discrepancy between the grammar and what is written in the language reference, the language reference is considered correct until the discrepancy is clarified and addressed.  I think this makes sense because the language reference is more specific than the grammar.  The grammar is looser than the language reference since many things are enforced in the parser, not the grammar.
    • Kramer/Rhodes: 14-0-0
    • Clarification
    • Compatible, substantive

    Description

      Is the formal grammar part of the formal definition of the spec? If so, in the case of discrepancies, which one is leading?

      Existing Wording:

      FSH has a formal grammar defined in ANTLR4.

      Attachments

        Activity

          People

            Unassigned Unassigned
            bvdh Bas van den Heuvel
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: