- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 19:55:45 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19597 --- Comment #18 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> --- We state that the result must be "as if" the processor did not support module import, which means it "MUST raise a static error [err:XQST0016] if it encounters a module declaration or a module import." But the specification also says "It is a static error [err:XQST0059] if the implementation is not able to process a module import by finding a valid module definition with the specified target namespace." And the specification also states "If more than one error is present, or if an error condition comes within the scope of more than one error defined in this specification, then any non-empty subset of these errors may be reported." So a processor that does not support module import is allowed to report either or both of these errors, and therefore a processor for which "import module" has been disabled is also allowed to report either or both of them. If we want to insist that XQST0016 takes precedence then we need need to introduce some kind of concept whereby some static errors take precedence over others. Incidentally, we usually describe errors by saying either "It is a static error if X", or "The processor raises a static error if X". The formulation for XQST0016, which uses "MUST", is unusual, and it is not clear why, or whether this carries any force in relation to the rule about multiple errors. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 19:55:50 UTC