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

[closed] Re: Name Attributes and Fragment Identifiers

From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 08:52:56 -0800
Message-ID: <28d56ece0801240852o3f3225cfvd59c7d80bc07f91c@mail.gmail.com>
To: "public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org" <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>

On further reflection and discussion with others, I'm OK with the
current strategy for
fragment identifiers.

On 11/12/07, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> wrote:
> We have a number of places where the 'name' attribute is provided.  In some
> cases it is just for providing a way to have a fragment identifier.
>
> For p:declare-step, p:when, p:otherwise, and p:pipeline-library, we say nothing
> about this attribute even though the declaration shows that such an attribute is
> allowed.
>
> Further, for all cases where the fragment identifier is allowed, we say nothing
> about its uniqueness.  In particular, it would be very easy for a
> pipeline author
> to use the same name attribute value on a p:when that they uses for a step.  In
> both cases the name attribute value is a fragment identifier and will cause an
> ambiguity as to which construct is the target of the URI.
>
> Even further, if the same name value is used on two steps in the same
> scope, it is
> an error but if the same name value is used on a step and one of the other
> constructs (e.g. p:when or p:declare-step) that can have a fragment identifier
> it is not an error.  This seems inconsistent.
>
> I think it would be better to say that in all cases the named construct is added
> to the "in-scope" names so that conflicts can be detected.  When you refer to
> something that you can't, you'd just get a different static error (e.g. you can
> refer to a port on a p:declare-step via its name).
>
> --
> --Alex Milowski
> "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the
> inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language
> considered."
>
> Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
>


-- 
--Alex Milowski
"The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the
inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language
considered."

Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2008 16:53:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 24 January 2008 16:53:31 GMT