W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > September 2005

[Bug 2259] [xqueryx] xqx:constructorFunctionExpr

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 12:47:18 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Cc:
Message-Id: <E1EGFcc-0000AY-U3@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2259

           Summary: [xqueryx]  xqx:constructorFunctionExpr
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Last Call drafts
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: XQueryX
        AssignedTo: jim.melton@acm.org
        ReportedBy: davidc@nag.co.uk
         QAContact: public-qt-comments@w3.org


What is the intended meaning of xqx:constructorFunctionExpr
In the schema and in the stylesheet it is equivalent to a one
argument xqx:functionCallExpr.

I could guess that it is intend to represent such constructs as xsl:int()
but guessing the meaning of something by parsing a camelcased element name
seems a rather strange specification.

Assuming that this _is_ the intended meaning of xqx:constructorFunctionExpr
then I think that a constructor function is syntactically and semantically a
function call, and should be expressed with xqx:functionCallExpr, and
xqx:constructorFunctionExpr should be deleted.

If for some reason both were allowed, then xqx:constructorFunctionExpr should be
restricted to _not_ use a type name of an in-scope atomic type as the function
name. However It is hard to see how that requirement could be expressed in
anything other than plain text. Neither the schema nor the stylesheet could
enforce it.
Received on Friday, 16 September 2005 12:47:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:57:08 UTC