W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > January 2009

[Bug 6027] [XPath] Extensions and Conformance

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 16:39:02 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1LKExK-0000YS-AX@farnsworth.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6027





--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@redhat.com>  2009-01-06 16:39:02 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I propose that we add this section to Conformance:
> 
> <add>
> 5.2 BNF Extensions
> 
> The XQuery language is defined in this specification. Any extensions to the
> BNF are not part of the XQuery language. Users can easily determine whether a
> query uses grammar not found in our
> EBNF by using the XQuery applets [APPLETS]. 
> 
> As a Working Group, we control the XQuery BNF. If a vendor extends the BNF
> in their product, that has no bearing on extensions we make in the future, even
> if they are incompatible with existing vendor extensions.
> </add>

Ooops - change that paragraph to:

The XQuery BNF is found in [Appendix A: XQuery BNF]. If a vendor extends this
BNF in their product, that has no bearing on the grammar of future versions of
this specification, which may contain grammatical productions that conflict
with existing vendor extensions.


> In addition, we should consider whether to soften this error text:
> 
> <quote>
> err:XPST0003
> It is a static error if an expression is not a valid instance of the grammar
> defined in A.1 EBNF.
> </quote>
> 


-- 
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 Tuesday, 6 January 2009 16:39:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:38 UTC