W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ql@w3.org > April to June 2004

Re: questionable syntax choices for XQuery

From: Jason Hunter <jhunter@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 14:17:23 -0700
Message-ID: <4086E4E3.5010300@acm.org>
To: Michael Rys <mrys@microsoft.com>
Cc: Xavier Franc <xfranc@online.fr>, www-ql@w3.org

By which Michael means: public-qt-comments @ w3.org

That's where you send formal requests so they'll be looked over by the 
WG.  You can subscribe to the list to see what others are saying.  Note 
that just because someone else mentioned your issue, it's OK to write in 
yourself with your take on the issue.  Otherwise the argument "only one 
person complained" can be used to reject a suggestion.  Just don't "me 
too" it.

-jh-

Michael Rys wrote:

> It may not be to late, but you need to send it to the right email list
> :-)
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: www-ql-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ql-request@w3.org] On Behalf
> 
> Of
> 
>>Xavier Franc
>>Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 1:45 PM
>>To: www-ql@w3.org
>>Subject: Re: questionable syntax choices for XQuery
>>
>>
>>
>>Some personal remarks about the semicolon separator between
> 
> declarations:
> 
>>- it has been added silently in November (not listed in change list)
>>  that's not nice for implementers...
>>
>>- I have never understood the necessity of this change.
>>  Is there some subtle lexical issue that I dont see ?
>>
>>  actually this separator is optional in my own implementation
>>  and I never noticed any parsing problem.
>>
>>- I agree with Jason that making parser writing easier
>>  is not a good justification for such a change.
>>
>>
>>Is it too late for suggesting to make the separator optional ?
> 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 21 April 2004 17:18:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 22 July 2006 00:10:19 GMT