W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > May 2016

[Bug 29667] [XSLT30] XTSE3050 with hidden components and homonymous name conflict is ambiguous

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 16:36:45 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-29667-523-PSc3IV3tyy@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29667

--- Comment #2 from Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl> ---
For the sake of argument, let's assume the package has only one function,
pkg:function1.

Then we have two lines in two xsl:use-package:

1) <xsl:accept component="function" names="pkg:function1" visibility="hidden"
/>
2) <xsl:accept component="function" names="pkg:function1" visibility="public"
/>

(1) hides pkg:function1 from the scope of the using package
(2) unhides (?) pkg:function1 and brings it in scope of the using package

The question I'm wondering about is whether we (dis)allow this correctly. And
in the case this does NOT raise an error (I think it does not), is the
declaration order then the definitive rule? Or highest/lowest visibility in the
cumulation of all xsl:accept?

I think that XTSE3050 says, with "other than hidden", that:

a) the first line is "hidden" for component pkg:function1
b) the second line is "public" for the same component
c) the names are homonymous, but one is hidden
d) so this error should NOT raise

Btw, we say "two or more homonymous components", do we explicitly mean two such
components from different (physical) packages, or may they be the result of
using the same package twice (as in this case)?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 27 May 2016 16:36:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 May 2016 16:36:48 UTC