[LSC] Ambiguities in the draft BFC spec - syntax

[William Howard]

The following syntax seems to cover all the bases

0 BFC (NOCERTIFY | CERTIFY [CW|{CCW}])
0 BFC ([CLIP] [CW|CCW] | NOCLIP | INVERTNEXT)

where (a | b) means either a or b
      [] indicates optional items
      {} indicates default value

this would give us the following as valid meta-commands (ignoring order)

0 BFC NOCERTIFY

0 BFC CERTIFY
0 BFC CERTIFY CW
0 BFC CERTIFY CCW

0 BFC

0 BFC CLIP
0 BFC CLIP CW
0 BFC CLIP CCW

0 BFC CW
0 BFC CCW

0 BFC NOCLIP

0 BFC INVERTNEXT


We are still left with the "no-op" version (0 BFC) but we can document that


W