- From: Liam R. E. Quin <liam@fromoldbooks.org>
- Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2025 16:27:02 -0500
- To: Bethan Tovey-Walsh <bytheway@linguacelta.com>, graydonish@gmail.com
- Cc: Norm Tovey-Walsh <norm@saxonica.com>, ixml <public-ixml@w3.org>
On Thu, 2025-02-06 at 13:16 +0000, Bethan Tovey-Walsh wrote: > > So I think a pragma with another pragma as its scope would > theoretically be possible, but it would have to be carefully designed > so that both the individual and the combined effects of the two > pragmas satisfied the two foundational principles. I think, for > example, that the design would have to permit either pragma to > function without the other - this might simply mean that each pragma > has a failsafe, which deactivates it if the other pragma is > nullified. That’s fair. I gave an example of a pragma that says, implementation B, use the immediately following pragma (if any) even though it's targeted at implementation A. The advantage of doing that rather than duplicating the pragma and changing the target implmentation is partly don't repeat yourself and partly for where the grammar is automatically generated, and partly because it allows annotating an existing gramma, pragmas and all, without changing the text of what is there. But i am not in opposition to forbidding these use cases either. liam -- Liam Quin, https://www.delightfulcomputing.com/ Available for XML/Document/Information Architecture/XSLT/ XSL/XQuery/Web/Text Processing/A11Y training, work & consulting. Barefoot Web-slave, antique illustrations: http://www.fromoldbooks.org
Received on Thursday, 6 February 2025 21:27:08 UTC