On Mon 08 Feb 2016 22:04, Matt Wette <matthew.we...@verizon.net> writes:
> One problem I have with the ref’ manual is the section on (ice-9 > match). The grammar has terms like “string” where I don’t know if > this means the literal term “string” or a string literal. It would be > nicer to have a grammar where the literal term “string” is in > code-case and a string literal is described by “string” in italics. I > have worked on rewriting the match match grammar as @example and as > @table. > > Does either of these look better to you? See the PDF attached. I am > willing to complete the whole mess in another format, but I need to > know which one is preferred, if any, and someone has to verify that > the new grammar specification is accurate. Would you mind attaching a .texi diff? I am having trouble getting context here. Thanks :) Andy
