- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 16:08:11 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19597 --- Comment #15 from Ghislain Fourny <g@28.io> --- If this helps, a possible alternate wording I suggested in February to address Mike's "Must act as though" concern is the following: A prohibit-feature option declaration provides a list of named features that must not be supported; if any of these QNames corresponds to a feature that the implementation supports, it must raise a static error [err:XQST0128]. And to replace: The features required or prohibited in one module of a query are independent of any features required or prohibited in other modules of the same query. With a text that is very close to its counterpart on a 1.0 version declaration: However, it is possible for an implementation to execute different modules with a different set of supported features. If a processor that normally supports feature A encounters a query that has a prohibit-feature option declaration on this feature A, it must do one of the following: - Process the module using the semantics of this specification with feature A's not being supported. - Raise a static error [err:XQST0128]. (And the same for require-feature). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 16:08:12 UTC