[Bug 28537] New: [FO30] [FO31] Examples on fn:element-with-id uses fn:id and is not aligned with accompanying text

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28537

            Bug ID: 28537
           Summary: [FO30] [FO31] Examples on fn:element-with-id uses
                    fn:id and is not aligned with accompanying text
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Recommendation
          Hardware: PC
                OS: Windows NT
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Functions and Operators 3.0
          Assignee: mike@saxonica.com
          Reporter: abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl
        QA Contact: public-qt-comments@w3.org

Under Examples, under 14.7.2 fn:element-with-id (FO30) and 14.5.2
fn:element-with-id (FO31) the text presently reads (numbering mine):

1) The expression id('ID21256')/name() returns "employee". (The xml:id 
   attribute has the is-id property, so the employee element is selected.).

2) The expression id('E21256')/name() returns "employee". (Assuming the
   empnr element is given the type xs:ID as a result of schema validation, 
   the element will have the is-id property and is therefore its parent is 
   selected. Note the difference from the behavior of fn:id.).

Text of (1) is technically correct, but the section is about
fn:element-with-id, not about fn:id. Replacing id('ID21256')/name() with
element-with-id('ID21256')/name() seems to make more sense.

Text of (2) is technically wrong, as id(...) returns the element with is-id
property, not its parent. Replacing id(...) with element-with-id(...) fixes
this.

And a suggestion: I noticed that fn:idref does not have any example. Not a big
deal, but the indirection of this function, and the same question as with fn:id
vs fn:element-with-id (i.e., does it select its parent or the attribute/element
with is-idref property) seems to warrant one ;).

PS: I filed this bug under FO30, but it applies equally to FO31 as well.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Wednesday, 22 April 2015 16:41:40 UTC