- 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