[fitsbits] further reopening of Public Comment Period on the CONTINUE convention

[Mark Calabretta]

On Fri, 22 Apr 2016 16:45:40 +0200 (CEST)
Lucio Chiappetti <lucio at lambrate.inaf.it> wrote:

>    Mark's sentence could be added in the same place
>    'CONTINUE may only be used for keywords that are declared to have a
>    value of type "xxxxxxxxxxx".  It must not be used for keywords of type
>    "yyyyyy"'
>
>    but requires the type names to defined. The sentence applies also to
>    private or project kwds, allowing them to choose among the two
>    'types'.

It's not necessary for private or project keywords to define any type.
Scanning header parsers (as you have called them) must deal with them
on the basis of whether CONTINUE is found or not found, in the same way
that they have to be prepared to accept integer, floating, logical,
complex, etc. types without prior knowledge.

>    Since the current standard mixes the definition of "string" and
>    "character" one should also add that "Keywords defined in this standard
>    as 'string' or 'character' are assumed to be of type 'yyyyyy'"

I suggested 'string' and 'long-string' on the basis that existing
reserved keywords were declared 'string', thus avoiding the need
to make major edits to the standard, as would be required if
'non-continuable' and 'continuable' were used.

If indeed some reserved keywords are declared to be type 'character'
then I suggest, for consistency regardless of anything else, that they
be changed to 'string'.

Regards,
Mark Calabretta