- 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