- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 15:20:06 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21719 O'Neil Delpratt <oneil@saxonica.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #1 from O'Neil Delpratt <oneil@saxonica.com> --- Bugs fixed and committed to cvs. Please see below for comments on the test cases. (In reply to comment #0) > - well-formed-feature-2: > This test case should also allow XQST0123 as result, because "qname" is no > valid feature. As an alternative, the feature string could be reduced to > "not:a:qname" Fixed > > - well-formed-feature-4: > I would have expected XPST0081 as error Fixed already by Tim some time ago > > - require-prohibit-1: > XQST0120 should also be accepted here I am rejecting this proposed change. I would think that during the static checking phase duplicates and clashing features would be caught. If you disagree please feel free to re-open the bug. > > - require-prohibit-3: > The current specification says that the "Serialization Feature does > not have a feature name, and cannot be required or prohibited in a > module.", > so this test should probably return XQST0123 instead. Test has been removed > > - require-prohibit-5: > XQST0120 should also be accepted here I am rejecting this proposed change. I would think that during the static checking phase duplicates and clashing features would be caught. If you disagree please feel free to re-open the bug. > > - require-all-optional-features-5-s: > I would suggest to also add XQST0128 as correct result, because the > spec says that a) "it is a static error [err:XQST0128] if a feature name > that an implementation supports appears in a prohibit-feature option > declaration and the implementation is unable to disable the feature" and > b) "all-optional-features corresponds to the set of all named features that > correspond to features listed in 5.2 Optional Features" This test looks to have been fixed already -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 1 May 2013 15:20:08 UTC