W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org > December 2008

2.13 3, Phrasing

From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:43:03 +0000
Message-ID: <711a73df0812160743s2992dc86g2916ab65a3cc1113@mail.gmail.com>
To: "xproc List" <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>

It is a static error if the signature of a known step in the version
library has changed, except for new options.

How to improve (clarify) the phrasing?
How will an implementation know that the author is assuming a
different signature than
the one he/she is expecting? E.g. same name, two parameters, both
string. If the semantics
change... how to tell?
[Definition: The signature of a step is the set of inputs, outputs,
and options that it is declared to accept.] The declaration for a step
provides a fixed signature which all its instances share.

Is the signature sufficiently unique for this error to be explicit?

The exception could/should be removed from this error IMHO since it
only indirectly relates
(relates only indirectly?) to the error?


Dave Pawson
Docbook FAQ.
Received on Tuesday, 16 December 2008 15:43:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:26 UTC