W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > August 2008

[Bug 5978] [FS] text adjustment of non-mixed complex types

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 19:57:47 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1KWGHz-0004Ev-Gx@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5978





--- Comment #1 from Michael Dyck <jmdyck@ibiblio.org>  2008-08-21 19:57:47 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
>
> That means that in the above document, element-only-content contains
> three nodes: <the-only-element /> and two text nodes.

I believe that's incorrect. XDM section 6.7.1 says:

    Text Nodes must satisfy the following constraint:
    1. If the parent of a text node is not empty, the Text Node
       must not contain the zero-length string as its content.
    ...
    When a Document or Element Node is constructed, ... If the
    resulting Text Node is empty, it must never be placed among
    the children of its parent, it is simply discarded.

Note that 6.7.3 "Construction from an Infoset" has two reminders of this,
one under 'content':

    Text Nodes are only allowed to be empty if they have no parents;
    an empty Text Node will be discarded when its parent is constructed,
    if it has a parent.

and the other at the end of the section:

    Text Nodes are only allowed to be empty if they have no parents;
    an empty Text Node will be discarded when its parent is constructed,
    if it has a parent.

Oddly, 6.7.4 "Construction from a PSVI" (from which you quoted) does not
have any such reminder. I wonder if the second reminder in 6.7.3 was
actually meant for 6.7.4. Checking the CVS history, it turns out that
initially, the second reminder *was* in 6.7.4, but then got moved to 6.7.3
in June 2005, as one of the 'fixes' for Bug 1293, presumably this point:

    6.7.4
    The statement that empty text nodes are discarded should
    not appear only under contruction from a PSVI, since it
    applies equally to construction from an infoset.

However, I believe this point was invalid, since the identical statement
already appeared in both 6.7.3 (Infoset) and 6.7.4 (PSVI). (And even if it
*had* been a valid point, the proper fix would have been to *copy* the
statement from 6.7.4 to 6.7.3, not *move* it.)

So I propose that we resolve this bug as 'invalid' and raise a separate one
against the XDM.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 21 August 2008 19:58:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:14:53 GMT