> R. Bastian:
>
> > CONTEXT_SOURCE ::= PREAMBLE "\starttext" TEXT "\stoptext" | CONTEXT_SOURCE
> >>> TEXT ::= STARTSTOPS | SETUPS | DEFINES | OTHERS [ TEXT
> >>
> >> luigi:
>
> > To be general, i think
> >> MY_CONTEXT_SOURCE ::= MACRO* END
> >>
> >
> R. Bastian:
>
> > I dont understand the sense of "\end\starttext"
>
> sense==semantic
>
> "\end""\starttext" is a valid string for a hypothetical bnf grammar of
> ContTeXt
> which is not valid for your bnf ;
> "\end""\starttext""\stoptext" is in your bnf grammar
> and has the same semantic of "\end""\starttext" .
>
> The point is : a bnf for Context can be hard to define
>
>
> luigi:
>
> think that a bnf or lpeg grammar is really useful for a sort of
> >> standard-ConTeXt
> >> or minimal-ConTeXt or light-ConTeXt
> >> ie a ConTeXt to use as "reference"
> >>
> >
> R. Bastian:
>
> > Exactly what I need : standard, minimal and light
> >
>
> Exactly what can be hard to define and capture in a bnf .
>
> wolfgang
>
> >
> > How could a BNF grammar help to learn ConTeXt,
>
> a bnf can help to build a syntax checker, a highlighter etc.
> Actually the only way to say that you have a valid ConTeXt string
> is running context on that string .
>
> The semantic is another story.