No, it's the opposite problem. For example the text talks about "ASCII alphanumerics [09-A-Za-z]", the relevant EBNF rule is called "ALPHANUMERIC", but its def

No, it's the opposite problem. For example the text talks about "ASCII alphanumerics [09-A-Za-z]", the relevant EBNF rule is called "ALPHANUMERIC", but its definition is only letters. It's not the problem that it's called "ALPHANUMERIC" -- it's that it should describe alphanumerics and it doesn't.