W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > January 2009

[Bug 6311] [XQX11] wndowVars is optional in the XQueryX 1.1 schema

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:20:35 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1LMXxL-0003or-Pm@wiggum.w3.org>


Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #1 from Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org>  2009-01-13 01:20:35 ---
I, provisionally, disagree.  In fact, it was just this consideration that
caused the situation you reported in Bug 6310.  I don't believe that a
<windowVars> element should appear in a <windowStartCondition> or
<windowEndCondition> element unless it has some content. Based on that
philosophy, my initial design of the <windowVars> element required the "least
optional" child, the <positionalVariableBinding> element. 

However, by accepting your proposed change for Bug 6310, we have introduced the
situation in which an empty list of window variables has two representations,
one with an empty <windowVars> element and one with no <windowVars> element. 

Instead of my immediately accepting the recommendation in this bug, I'd like
more discussion of whether my original design was appropriate (meaning that a
<windowVars> element should have a required child <positionalVariableBinding>
element), or whether it's better to make the child <positionalVariableBinding>
element optional in the <windowVars> element and then require the (possibly
empty) <windowVars> child element in the <windowStartCondition> or
<windowEndCondition> elements. 

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2009 01:20:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:57:25 UTC