> If the error would have been caught by a try/catch then the XProc > processor is non-conformant. It's only allowed to report the error > statically if it can determine statically that a dynamic error will > always occur: if it would have been caught by a try/catch then it > wouldn't always occur That seems a bit tortuous: I would have thought that an error that is caught still occurs. And the wording of 4.6 seems to agree: ... if any errors occur, the p:try abandons the first subpipeline ... Can we change the sentence at the end of section 3 to say ... can determine statically that a dynamic error will always occur and not be caught by a p:try/p:catch ... -- RichardReceived on Monday, 8 October 2007 16:40:37 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:42 GMT