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

[closed] Re: propose a implementation defined warning mechanism

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 14:38:35 -0500
To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2fxw3w85g.fsf@nwalsh.com>
Hi Jim,

The WG discussed this and decided not to make any changes in this
regard. Implementations are free to warn when Mercury is in retrograde
if they want.

/ James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| Hello all,
|
| seems like an oversight to not have any concept of warnings in XProc.
|
| I would propose adding a implementation defined warning, not unlike
| many existing specs have.
|
| in section 6 Errors add (either 6.3 or top level) ;
|
| ------------------------
|
| An XProc implementation may also raise warnings at any time during
| XProc processing. The circumstances in which warnings are generated
| and managed are implementation defined.
|
| ------------------------
|
| will also need to add some words here  A.1 Implementation-defined features
|
| cheers, Jim Fuller

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | It is so comic to hear oneself called
http://nwalsh.com/            | old, even at ninety I suppose.--Alice
                              | James

Received on Friday, 8 February 2008 19:38:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 8 February 2008 19:38:45 GMT