Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
This issue should be of type "specification" but I haven't found a place to set
it.
Original comment by timo.boe...@gmail.com
on 12 Dec 2012 at 9:53
This issue was closed by revision r597.
Original comment by cmung...@gmail.com
on 4 Nov 2013 at 8:33
I agree the "+" would be more elegant, but we try to stick to the same BNF as
used in the OWL specs.
Thanks for pointing out the issue with xrefs. The grammar here is ugly due to
the necessity to fit existing obo files in the wild.
Original comment by cmung...@gmail.com
on 4 Nov 2013 at 8:34
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
timo.boe...@gmail.com
on 12 Dec 2012 at 9:51