- 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