- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2013 15:41:00 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21568
Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mike@saxonica.com
--- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> ---
The accepted interpretation of the spec is, I believe, that the constraint
/* xgs: reserved-function-names */
applies only to function calls, not to function declarations, and therefore it
is legal for an unprefixed function declaration to use a reserved function
name.
Personally I think this interpretation is open to challenge, because Appendix
A.3 says normatively "The following names are not allowed as function names in
an unprefixed form" without qualification; but the consensus appears to be that
the constraint was only intended to apply to function calls, and if the intent
had been otherwise, the contraint would have been linked from the appropriate
place in the grammar.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 3 April 2013 15:41:05 UTC