- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 19:26:25 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3081 david_marston@us.ibm.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |david_marston@us.ibm.com ------- Comment #2 from david_marston@us.ibm.com 2006-04-05 19:26 ------- The main point of doubt arose from the end of 5.2: The attribute does not affect other names, for example function names, variable names, or names used as arguments to the key or system-property functions. It actually should affect the first argument of key() until the point that the expression is reduced to a single string, which must be a valid XML name. Then, if that string is an NCName, it should not have an effect. That way, it will sync up with xsl:key/@name, where x-d-n does not have an effect. It should always affect the second argument to key(), even if typed as xs:NAME, because that argument is not being used as a cross-referencing name. (But it is being used as a value to be tested against @use values; see below.) I think the WG intends the same about AVTs: x-d-n affects what is inside the braces, but once that is reduced to an NCName, it does not affect the name. It would be useful to say something at 16.3.1, addressing @name briefly, because there is also potential vagueness between the effect of x-d-n on @use vs. the sequence constructor as content. It's clear enough that x-d-n affects @use as an expression, and @match as a pattern also, but its effect on the content constructor should be clarified. It should affect the expressions found in the content constructor (e.g., xsl:when/@test), but not the resulting values nor resulting @use values, should they happen to be valid NCNames. BTW, I did not feel confident that the list of items affected by x-d-n at 5.2 was an exhaustive list. Now that I see the comments in this bug entry, I think the policy regarding path expressions is that it only affects source-facing names, not output-facing names. I think that it affects type names facing both ways.
Received on Wednesday, 5 April 2006 19:26:38 UTC