W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > August 2007

Re: Remarks on W3C Editor's Draft 6 August 2007

From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:05:23 -0700
Message-ID: <28d56ece0708131605v574b9d7ald912f813aa994dd5@mail.gmail.com>
To: "XProc WG" <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>

On 8/13/07, Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/13/07, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 8/13/07, Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 8/13/07, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 8/8/07, Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > s/A.2.1 Add Attributes/A.2.1 Add Attribute/
> > > > >
> > > > > Please specify also the XPath Context for the match option
> > > > >
> > > > > == boolean ==
> > > > >
> > > > > Please fix the inconsistencies between yes/true/no/false everywhere
> > > > > and and clarify this position for p:equal (which currently generates
> > > > > 0/1)
> > > >
> > > > All options that are booleans use 'yes' and 'no'.  Only XPath expression
> > > > evaluations use 'true' and 'false' as logical values.
> > > >
> > > > p:equal does need to be clarified as to what is in the c:result
> > > > element.
> > > >
> > > > "yes" and "no" or "true" or "false" ?
> > > >
> > > > Opinions anyone?
> > >
> > >
> > > It seems this issue was already raised and solved
> > >
> > > The problem is that everywhere we have an option which need to have a
> > > boolean value, it's just a pain to make it work with yes/no
> > > So yes/no and adding true/false seems just good to me
> >
> > I was not suggesting we add "true/false" to option values.  Only asking
> > what the value of the c:result element should be for p:equals.  If we wanted
> > to be totally consistent, we'd use the literals "yes" and "no".
>
> Sorry, I misunderstand
> I would say that to be fully consistent with XPath, the answer should
> "true" or "false"
>

While I agree with you on that, we choose to be inconsistent with
XPath for boolean option values.  This would be the only place
where booleans have the values "true" and "false".

I'd rather that boolean values be consistent with the xsd:boolean
simple type but I seem to have lost out to those that prefer being
consistent with XSLT's use of "yes" and "no".

Our use of "yes" and "no" as literal value will prevent us from
ever typing boolean options as xs:boolean in some future version
of XProc.  That is, unless XML Schema allows different enumerated
values for booleans--but don't hold your breath for an XML Schema
2.0 because 1.1 took a very long time and it still isn't a recommendation.


-- 
--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 Monday, 13 August 2007 23:05:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:54 GMT