@perlpunk @ingydotnet Could I ask why this YAML is correct? Several parsers have problems with it (http://matrix.yaml.io/details/G5U8.html), and I'm looking at the spec but can't understand why the test should pass.
The relevant rules would be ns-plain-first and subrules:
- is an indicator, so the second alternative of ns-plain-first must be used. The next character (, and ]) must then be "safe". I believe we are in flow-key or flow-in context(?), so ns-plain-safe-in is used. Because , and ] are flow indicators, neither list element would be accepted.
@perlpunk @ingydotnet Could I ask why this YAML is correct? Several parsers have problems with it (http://matrix.yaml.io/details/G5U8.html), and I'm looking at the spec but can't understand why the test should pass.
The relevant rules would be
ns-plain-first
and subrules:-
is an indicator, so the second alternative ofns-plain-first
must be used. The next character (,
and]
) must then be "safe". I believe we are in flow-key or flow-in context(?), sons-plain-safe-in
is used. Because,
and]
are flow indicators, neither list element would be accepted.Could you explain where I'm going wrong?