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

[Bug 6513] [XQuery] inconsistent terminology in definition of derives-from()

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:00:10 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1LjEIU-0000vK-PS@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6513





--- Comment #5 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>  2009-03-16 15:00:10 ---
>the ISSD contains all statically known types

This may be your understanding, but it's not mine. My understanding is that
import-schema (like import-module, and like xs:import) imports a namespace, and
licenses the use of names in that namespace. It does not license (or make
"in-scope") any names from any other namespace, for example a namespace that is
imported transitively, or a namespace that is imported by a different query
module.

Although we allow implementations to augment the ISSD, my understanding is that
this is designed so that, like the rest of the query prolog, an API can provide
equivalent facilities to the declarations in the prolog, for example an
importSchemaNamespace() method. It wasn't intended to make the effect of import
schema transitive.

I agree that there's nothing explicit in the spec to say that import-schema is
expected to behave in the same way as import-module and xs:import, that is,
non-transitively. The sooner we clear this up, the better. And we certainly
shouldn't leave it so that import-schema is transitive in some implementations,
and not in others.


-- 
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 Monday, 16 March 2009 15:00:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:14:56 GMT