[Bug 12280] New: XSLT 3.0, Section 4.5.1: Lack of clarity in the definition of a format-token

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12280

           Summary: XSLT 3.0, Section 4.5.1: Lack of clarity in the
                    definition of a format-token
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Working drafts
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Functions and Operators 3.0
        AssignedTo: mike@saxonica.com
        ReportedBy: oneil@saxonica.com
         QAContact: public-qt-comments@w3.org


In the description of the format-token criteria, it does not clearly state what
is a format-token. This would help in the understanding of the bullet point
"Any other format token indicates a numbering sequence...".

To help in the clarification please see an email I received from Christian
Grun:

1) format-integer(1, 'bo')

This query is accepted, as the character 'b' is interpreted as format
token that "indicates a numbering sequence in which that token
represents the number 1 (one)" [1]. The trailing "o" seems to be
ignored; I would rather have expected it to be interpreted as optional
"format modifier".

2) format-integer(1, 'oo')

This query is rejected with the message "The format modifier is not
valid". My assumption that the first "o" is interpreted as an optional
"format modifier"?

3) format-integer(1, 'boo')

The (expected) error of this query might underline the assumption for Query 2.

4) format-integer(1, 'bb')

This query is accepted, and the trailing 'b' is ignored (which is
probably ok, as I'm not sure if this case is reflected by the spec).


To arrive at a consistent behavior, it might suffice to decide how
trailing, unparsed characters are to be treated, and to always
interpret the first character(s) as "primary format token".

-- 
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 Thursday, 10 March 2011 10:48:29 UTC