W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > April 2011

[Bug 12455] New: [XSLT 3.0] Predicates in new-style patterns

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 13:30:06 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-12455-523@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12455

           Summary: [XSLT 3.0] Predicates in new-style patterns
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Working drafts
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows NT
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: XSLT 3.0
        AssignedTo: mike@saxonica.com
        ReportedBy: mike@saxonica.com
         QAContact: public-qt-comments@w3.org


In 5.5.3 rules 5 and 6 we talk of an item "satisfying a predicate". We don't
say exactly what we mean by this. Examples are

~xs:integer[. gt 0]

(foo|bar)[baz]

There are two ways we could define it:

(a) we simply take the effective boolean value of the predicate

(b) we apply the usual rules for filter expressions, with the special
interpretation of [position() = N] if the value is numeric.

Note that numeric predicates here have no practical utility, because the focus
is always a singleton (position() is always 1). So we have a choice between a
rule that is simple (a), or a rule that is consistent with elsewhere (b).

We might also want to reconsider the use of a singleton focus for a pattern
like (foo|bar). It means that match="(foo|bar)[last()]" does not do what the
user probably expects.

-- 
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 Friday, 8 April 2011 13:30:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:45 UTC