- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 15:35:45 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9302 Henry Zongaro <zongaro@ca.ibm.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #11 from Henry Zongaro <zongaro@ca.ibm.com> 2010-07-20 15:35:45 --- >From the draft minutes of the XQuery and XSL F2F meeting:[6] (All links are member-only) DECIDED We adopt http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xsl-query/2010Jul/0159.html as the solution to http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9302, modulo the following corrections: The schema seems to have errors: Errors in proposed schema for serialization parameters http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xsl-query/2010Jul/0164.html This pattern is too loose - there's a better RE in the XML spec: <xs:simpleType name="encoding-string-type"> <xs:restriction base="xs:string"> <xs:pattern value="[!-]*"/> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType> Is the hyphen behind the 9 correct here? It looks suspicious ... <xs:simpleType name="pubid-char-string-type"> <xs:restriction base="xs:string"> <xs:pattern value="([- \r\n\ta-zA-Z0-9-'()+,./:=?;!*#@$_%])*"/> </xs:restriction> </xs:simpleType> The spec needs examples that compile against the schema. Mike Kay has a version that parses here - he hasn't fixed the patterns: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xsl-query/2010Jul/0165.html "output:parameter-document =": should be no = ACTION Henry to fix problems with the schema and add examples that parse against the schema. Henry to change 'ser' prefix to 'output' DECISION - move serialization options (XQuery C3) to the static context. Module scope. Implementations are allowed to overwrite or augment. Consistency rules column needs to be filled in. [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xsl-query/2010Jul/0174.html -- 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, 20 July 2010 15:35:47 UTC