search

ucum-org / ucum

https://ucum.org
Other
55 stars 10 forks source link

Two concerns on syntax tree #138

Closed timbrisc closed 7 years ago

timbrisc commented 8 years ago

Issue migrated from trac ticket # 189

component: unit definitions | priority: minor | resolution: fixed

2016-09-28 19:17:45: carsten@epic.com created the issue

I have 2 concerns about the complete syntax tree outlined in Exhibit 1 here: http://unitsofmeasure.org/ucum.html

First

This definition of must be wrong since it points to itself as the last option. Instead, the third option ought to be right?

::= “.” | “/” | **** -*Suggested Fix:** ::= “.” | “/” | **** ## Second For the rule, this seems to suggest that any may be used with any , but that is not the case since only the SI units may use the prefixes right? ::= | **** -*Suggested Fix:** ::= | **** -* ::= | **
timbrisc commented 7 years ago

2016-12-14 15:53:43: gschadow@pragmaticdata.com changed status from new to closed

timbrisc commented 7 years ago

2016-12-14 15:53:43: gschadow@pragmaticdata.com set resolution to fixed

timbrisc commented 7 years ago

2016-12-14 15:53:43: gschadow@pragmaticdata.com changed component from help to unit definitions

timbrisc commented 7 years ago

2016-12-14 15:53:43: gschadow@pragmaticdata.com

timbrisc commented 7 years ago

2016-12-14 15:53:43: gschadow@pragmaticdata.com commented

First: yes you seem to be right. Fixed.

Second: we did not intend to include the disallowability of prefix-atom pairing in this syntax. I have added a bracket <ATOM-SYMBOL[metric]> to indicate this as a constraint, referring to our "metric" property (as the combinability with a prefix applies to units other than SI).