[Bug 15043] New: [XQuery30] require-feature and prohibit-feature

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15043

           Summary: [XQuery30] require-feature and prohibit-feature
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Member-only Editors Drafts
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: XQuery 3.0
        AssignedTo: jonathan.robie@gmail.com
        ReportedBy: andrew.eisenberg@us.ibm.com
         QAContact: public-qt-comments@w3.org
             Group: XSLXQuery_WG


At our Oct./Nov. F2F Meeting, we adopted the following:

DECISION:  For XQuery 3.0, adopt direction 1 in Ghislain's proposal: 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xsl-query/2011Oct/0091.html

Our draft spec does not fully reflect this proposal.


1) We need to better describe the feature/sub-feature relationship of Q:F and
Q:F-something. This is shown only by example in our draft spec.

2) The rules for prohibiting/requiring *-all-optional-features need to be
better spelled out. Requiring a feature automatically requires all of its
parent features.

3) While not addressed in the proposal, I believe that we should recognize that
prohibiting/requiring Q:all-optional-features should prohibit/require all
top-level features in the Q namespace.

4) Rule 2, raising an error of the same feature is both required and
prohibited, is missing. It is only partially addressed by the current
statement:

"It is a static error [err:XQST0127] if the same feature name appears in both a
require-feature option declaration and a prohibit-feature option declaration in
a given module."

Features can be required by requiring one of their sub-features.

5) I believe that the following should be an error, but the spec is not clear
on this point:

declare option prohibit-feature "all-extensions";
declare option require-feature "gis:geography";

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://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, 2 December 2011 18:55:31 UTC