r/reagle@w3.org/2002.05.29/11:27:31 > >On Sunday 26 May 2002 08:31 am, Gregor Karlinger wrote: >> A possible solution for this problem could be to explicitely >> forbid an emtpy input for the XPath Filter 2.0 transform. Any >> thought? > >How would one forbid this? We can't stop a user from specifying an XPath >expression that misses the mark, right? If we said throw an error, that >would stop the processing of the signature -- maybe there are other useful >XPath transforms. We could add a processing step that says if the input >node-set is empty the transform is done. Just as it is an error to use here() in an XPath transform that is processing a different document from the signature document, it is an error to supply an empty node set to the XPath filter transform. I agree with Gregor; the transform should fail and processing of the reference should stop. MerlinReceived on Wednesday, 29 May 2002 12:09:45 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:15 GMT