The field name written in syntax definition is wrong

The field name in syntax definition should be written as "SKIPIF"

page 1560, line 8 Part 4, 2.16.5.65
SKIPIF

te

Proposed Disposition of DIS 29500 Comment BR-0023 (Modified: 2007-12-07) Agreed; the resolution to this comment is included in that for comments DE-0052 and FR-0074, which resulted in the complete replacement of the syntax in Part 4, §2.16.1, pages 1487­1489 by one defined using the notation from EBNF (as defined in ISO/IEC 14977:1996). Fixing the original syntax would have resulted in the following changes to Part 4, §2.16.5.65, page 1,560, line 8: 2.16.5.65 SKIPIF Syntax: SKIP IF Expression-1 Operator Expression-2 Expression-1: expression Expression-2: expression However, given the rewrite of the whole syntax, this change was incorporated in the new syntax, as follows: 2.16.5.65 SKIPIF Syntax: SKIP IF Expression-1 Operator Expression-2 comparison Expression-1: expression Expression-2: expression where comparison= expression, comparison-operator, expression ; comparison-operator= "=" | "<>" | "<" | "<=" | ">" | ">=" ; Similar Comments: FR-0299

Tag and Go

No Comments

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

  • Argentina (1)
  • Australia (30)
  • Austria (1)
  • Belgium (1)
  • Brazil (64)
  • Bulgaria (3)
  • Canada (79)
  • Chile (217)
  • China (1)
  • Colombia (237)
  • Czech Republic (75)
  • Denmark (168)
  • Ecma (76)
  • Ecuador (1)
  • Finland (15)
  • France (592)
  • Germany (162)
  • Ghana (12)
  • Greece (113)
  • India (82)
  • Iran (58)
  • Ireland (12)
  • Israel (33)
  • Italy (2)
  • Japan (82)
  • Jordan (1)
  • Kenya (81)
  • Malaysia (23)
  • Malta (5)
  • Mexico (7)
  • New Zealand (54)
  • Norway (12)
  • Peru (10)
  • Philippines (7)
  • Poland (4)
  • Portugal (118)
  • Singapore (2)
  • South Africa (17)
  • South Korea (25)
  • Spain (1)
  • Switzerland (19)
  • Thailand (1)
  • Tunisia (3)
  • Turkey (1)
  • UK (635)
  • Uruguay (18)
  • USA (288)
  • Venezuela (73)