- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 03:44:08 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1802
Summary: [FS] editorial: E.1.3 Attribute filtering
Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
Version: Last Call drafts
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: Formal Semantics
AssignedTo: simeon@us.ibm.com
ReportedBy: jmdyck@ibiblio.org
QAContact: public-qt-comments@w3.org
E.1.3 Attribute filtering
Notation
"Value filter @QName => ()"
"Value filter @QName => SimpleValue"
But SimpleValue derives (), so in a judgment where the RHS value is
(), it could be an instance of either form. And they appear to mean
slightly different things.
"Value filter @QName => () or SimpleValue"
This seems fairly ad hoc. Instead of:
Value1 filter @xsi:nil => () or false
why not use existing notation and say:
Value1 filter @xsi:nil => SimpleValue
SimpleValue in { (), false }
Sem / rule (1|2) / premise 1
"dynEnv |- Value1 of attribute:: => Value2"
What kind of judgment is this? Maybe you mean:
dynEnv |- axis attribute:: of Value1 => Value2
(leftover from last year, comment #236)
Sem / rule (1|2) / premise 2
"dynEnv |- Value2 of attribute, QName => ..."
Again, what kind of judgment is it?
I don't even have a guess.
(leftover from last year, comment #237)
Received on Friday, 22 July 2005 03:44:13 UTC