[sc34wg3] Comments on comments

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Xuân,
>
> Yes, especially as CTM as specified in the drafts so has not been
> parseable by common regular expression parsers, either.. ;-)

* Lars Heuer
>
> That's simply not true. You should give reasons if you think it is not
> parsable.

Like Lars I'm not convinced that this is true. That is, I think you  
probably *could* have written the CTM grammar as a regular expression,  
although it would have been a huge and ugly one. I can't think of any  
structures in CTM which can be nested to arbitrary depth.

As Xuan pointed out, nestable comments will break this.

However, as Xuan and I agreed, it doesn't really matter...

--Lars M.