- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:28:41 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1498 ------- Additional Comments From mike@saxonica.com 2005-06-15 07:28 ------- Thanks for the comment. The conventions for describing error codes in XSLT are intended to be consistent with those for XPath, and they are intended to be in the same namespace. I shall probably respond to your comment by adding a pointer from the XSLT specification to the XPath specification. Personally, I must admit to some ambivalence on this. Although we have structured the error codes as 8-character codes with fixed-size subfields in the good old COBOL/punched-card tradition, I would hate to see anyone examining an error code to see whether columns 3-4 contain "DE". In fact, we haven't defined any interfaces that communicate error codes, so it's a little bit difficult to see where we should describe their semantics (if indeed they have any semantics). I have tended more to the view that the code is simply an anchor that designers of APIs can use to refer to an error condition if they choose to do so, and responsibility for defining properties of errors and interfaces for getting such properties belongs with the API specification. However, the XPath and XQuery specifications lean more towards setting guidelines and expectations for the API designers to follow.
Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2005 07:28:44 UTC