- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 13:34:35 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16565 --- Comment #2 from Tim Mills <tim@cbcl.co.uk> 2012-03-31 13:34:34 UTC --- I've thought of the URIs as being just an identifier scheme, as opposed to a means of locating some resource which needs to be fetched. In this sense, the implementation uses the identifier to determine which of some set of collations supported by the implementation's runtime to use. Thus it makes sense for collations to be part of the static tcontext. As the specification stands, whether a collation is specified statically or dynamically, it still has to identify one of the statically known collations. However, your viewpoint is more flexible in that collations can be selected outside of those statically known to the implementation. Locating the implementation of a collation at runtime does lead to the possibility of that implementation changing its behaviour. For example, it might change (or disappear) between compile time and runtime. Thus compile-time evaluation of any exprssions involving collations might lead to incorrect results. I'd expect there to be some use in the wild of relative collation URIs in combination with a static base URI declaration just to save typing out some long and forgettable URIs! -- 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 Saturday, 31 March 2012 13:34:38 UTC