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

Re: XS0043 and err:XS0045

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 07:47:53 -0500
To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2wsfjr72e.fsf@nwalsh.com>
Toman_Vojtech@emc.com writes:
>> I think these should probably be dynamic errors and I actually think
>> 43 subsumes 45.
>
> I agree that the codes could be merged together, but why do you want
> them to be dynamic errors?

Because in the general case, option values can be constructed at
runtime. If we don't make 43/45 dynamic, then we'll need dynamic
errors *as well* for the cases where they can't be checked statically.

e.g.:

<p:add-attribute attribute-value="5">
  <p:with-option name="attribute-name"
                 select="QName('http://example.com/',/*/@name)"/>
</p:add-attribute>

> (Just noticed that for p:add-attribute, the spec just says: "The value
> of the attribute-name option must be a QName. The corresponding expanded
> name is used to construct the added attribute." So, if the value is not
> a valid QName, the spec does not say what error should be raised.)

I think the idea was to state some of the really common errors (like
invalid option names/types) in one place, rather than having to repeat
them over and over again.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Before doing someone a favour, make
http://nwalsh.com/            | sure that he isn't a madman.--Eugéne
                              | Labiche

Received on Tuesday, 4 November 2008 12:50:17 UTC

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