RE: simple ?= 1-line multiline, redux

[Roger Crew <rfc@MICROSOFT.com>]

> In fact, I think this is the only reasonable interpretation given the
> following verbiage at the beginning of 2.2.1:
> 
>   Each argument to a message is named by a keyword.
>   The keyword consists of an identifier (a string matching
>   the <ident> nonterminal), optionally followed by an asterisk;
	...
> That is, the asterisk is part of the keyword, hence it is part of the
> argument name.  bar and bar* are thus distinct keywords and therefore name
> different arguments.  
> 
I've just noticed that there's a comma in the 3rd line of the quoted passage
from 2.2.1.  If one assumes the comma to be anything other than a typo, then
"optionally followed by an asterisk" becomes this weird-ass dangling clause.
Of course one could reason that the grammatical incorrectness of the comma
implies that it must be a typo and so my original interpretation holds.  

I vote for quietly removing the comma.

Bleah...