- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:00:42 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24266 Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> --- The WG considered this on 2014-03-21 and there was some sympathy for the idea. The editor was asked to propose detailed wording. Here is the proposal: The following paragraph appears in 26.1 Basic XSLT processor: The mandatory requirements of this specification are taken to include the mandatory requirements of XPath 3.0, as described in [XPath 3.0]. A requirement is mandatory unless the specification includes wording (such as the use of the words should or may) that clearly indicates that it is optional. Move this provision out of 26.1 into 26, because it applies to all XSLT processors not only to Basic processors; and expand it as follows: The mandatory requirements of this specification are taken to include the mandatory requirements of [XPath 3.0], [Data Model], and [Functions and Operators]. An XSLT 3.0 processor MUST provide a mode of operation which conforms to the 3.0 versions of those specifications as extended by [21 XPath Extensions]. It MAY also provide a mode of operation which conforms to later versions of those specifications; in such cases the detail of how XSLT 3.0 interacts with new features introduced by such later versions (for example, extensions to the data model) is *implementation-defined*. In 26.3 Serialization Feature add a paragraph: A processor that claims conformance with the Serialization Feature must satisfy the mandatory requirements of [Serialization]. It MUST provide a mode of operation which conforms to the 3.0 version of that specification. It MAY also provide a mode of operation which conforms to a later version of that specification; in such cases the detail of how XSLT 3.0 interacts with new features introduced by such a version (for example, support for new serialization properties) is *implementation-defined*. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 21 March 2014 10:00:44 UTC