- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 22:33:25 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1850 ------- Additional Comments From holstege@mathling.com 2005-08-31 22:33 ------- Michael, I think I meant what your "I was going to propose..." text says. (As usual, of course, you said it better.) While the apparent difference with Perl and Java might be troubling, I think what we are discovering here is that they are both woefully underspecified. I do have at least one data point that the semantics you outline is implementable in XQuery regular expressions, FWIW. I am not happy with making these be an error, because we see plenty of scenarios where regular expressions are not literals, but constructed, and I think the semantics you suggest makes sense, even if it leads to results that may seem surprising until you think about it. I also think that you set of cases is too broad: By your rules patterns with such innocuous items as "[^\s] or or "\p{Zs}" cause errors in case-insensitive mode. I also don't see why patterns with back references should be errors. It gets to the point where you either have some pretty complex rules about when these constructs are "non-confusing" from a case-sensitivity point of view, and therefore OK, or you are limiting regular expressions in case-insensitive mode almost to the point of uselessness, where the workaround is, with a fair amount of pain, to reconstruct essentially the semantics proposed.
Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2005 22:33:27 UTC