Re: Issue: references to an external grammar

James Clark wrote:

> Is the issue here simply whether we want a shorthand for
...
>?

I do not have any good ideas.  But here are some questions.

- How do we avoid rereading?

- Does it make sense to introduce two constructs?  One is for including 
external patterns without collisions of named patterns, and the other 
is for referencing named patterns in already-included patterns.

Cheers,

Makoto