- 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