- 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