- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 07:33:44 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1381 Summary: [XQuery] some editorial comments on A.1.1 grammar-note: reserved-function-names Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT Version: Last Call drafts Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: XQuery AssignedTo: chamberl@almaden.ibm.com ReportedBy: jmdyck@ibiblio.org QAContact: public-qt-comments@w3.org A.1.1 grammar-note: reserved-function-names [See a later comment for suggested alternate wording.] "Some unprefixed function names may be confused by the parser" Using the usual spec-y interpretation of "may", this means that parsers are allowed to be confused! Instead, maybe: Parsers could be confused if we allowed unprefixed function names with the same spelling as some keywords. "function name invocation" Change to "FunctionCall". "an incomplete IfExpr" Maybe change to "the start of an IfExpr". (Otherwise someone might say, "But an incomplete IfExpr is illegal.") (alternative?) In leading-lone-slash, you gave an easy way to construct a semantically equivalent query. How about for this? I think there's no local 'fix' -- you have to either rename the function, or else use a prefixed name, which could involve binding the namespace to a prefix.
Received on Wednesday, 11 May 2005 07:33:49 UTC