- From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 13:02:17 -0700
- To: Norm Tovey-Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-ixml@w3.org
Thank you, Norm and Bethan! Norm Tovey-Walsh writes: > We take the position that conformant interpretation of pragmas should > not alter the semantics of an ixml grammar. What does "the semantics of an ixml grammar" mean? What does it mean to alter the semantics? > (You can’t have a conformant pragma that changes the rules!) How would that be enforced? Is the enforcement mechanism that if someone defines a pragma that changes the rules (whatever that might be taken to mean), other people have the right to point at that pragma and say "that one is a non-conforming pragma"? Can preservation of the semantics be tested for? Or will it require human judgement? > We think Tom and Michael > might disagree and look forward to their spirited input :-) Do pragmas in XQuery change the semantics of the query in which they are embedded? Or do they leave the semantics of the query as they are defined by the XQuery spec alone, even when they request that processors capable of evaluating the alternate expression inside the pragma evaluate that expression in place of the 'fallback expression'? Michael -- C. M. Sperberg-McQueen Black Mesa Technologies LLC http://blackmesatech.com
Received on Friday, 28 January 2022 20:02:42 UTC