Ticket #4 (new defect)
BNF wrong for leading solidus
| Reported by: | gschadow | Owned by: | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | major | Milestone: | |
| Keywords: | Cc: |
Description (last modified by gschadow) (diff)
Eric Russell points out:
Is the definition unit for the Oersted "/[pi].A/m" valid in UCUM?
In the BNF grammar, it appears that a solidus that is not preceeded by anything may only be followed by a <component>, which would mean the ".A/m" in the Oersted's definition unit couldn't be valid unless it were parenthesized. However, the pushdown-state automaton does not appear to contain the same restriction on the initial solidus. Are the two actually inconsistent, or am I misunderstanding something?
Let's see, the intent is:
§7 algebraic unit terms ![...] ■3 The division operator can be used
as a binary and unary operator, i.e. a leading solidus will invert the unit that directly follows it.
so /a.b/c is clear the same as 1/a.b/c or a-1.b.c-1.
The BNF seems not to reflect that:
<component> ::= <annotatable><annotation>
| <annotatable>
| <annotation>
| <factor>
| “(”<term>“)”
<term> ::= “/”<component>
| <component>“.”<term>
| <component>“/”<term>
| <component>
That's wrong. I must not have been thinking clearly.
