[Bug 15646] New: Definitions of \i and \c in regular expressions

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15646

           Summary: Definitions of \i and \c in regular expressions
           Product: XML Schema
           Version: 1.0 only
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows NT
            Status: NEW
          Keywords: resolved
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Datatypes: XSD Part 2
        AssignedTo: David_E3@VERIFONE.com
        ReportedBy: cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com
         QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
                CC: mike@saxonica.com, cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com
        Depends on: 11421
            Blocks: 11765


+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #11421 +++
+++ Bug 11421 relates to XSD 1.1, this bug to XSD 1.0 +++

The definition of \c is straightforward enough:

   the set of name characters, those matched by NameChar

where NameChar is a link to a production in the XML 1.1 specification.

The definition of \i by contrast is rather strange:

  the set of initial name characters, those matched 
  by NameStartChar in [XML] or by Letter | '_' | ':' 
  in [XML 1.0]

How are we to read this? I don't think "or" here means "the union of
these two sets of characters"; I think it means use one definition if
you're using XML 1.0, a different definition if you are using XML
1.1. But why doesn't it use NameStartChar in both cases? What seems to
have happened is that in XML 1.0 ed 4 and earlier, names were defined
to start with (Letter | '_' | ':'), but in XML 1.0 ed 5, they are
defined to start with NameStartChar (which is a larger set of
characters). So we have chosen a definition that fixes \i to the
pre-5th-edition of XML names, while moving \c forward to the
definition used in 1.0ed5 and 1.1. This can't be right. I would
suggest aligning both character classes with the definitions of XML
names as they appear in XML 1.0 ed 5 and XML 1.1.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Friday, 20 January 2012 17:40:53 UTC