W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > August 2015

[Bug 20843] [XT3TS] function-1902

From: <nobody@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2015 00:15:36 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-20843-523-Gfd1PF7LuF@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20843

--- Comment #7 from Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl> ---
The intent of this test is to check if a 2.0 and 3.0 processor has the "proper"
set of functions. From your comment, I think there is no way to test this using
the approach used in the test.

I agree that any functions inside unknown non-reserved namespaces of XSLT 2.0
or XPath 2.0 should be considered extension functions.

I remember that I have seen a restriction in XPath 2.0 (or 3.0?) where
expansion of functions in the function namespace was not allowed, discussed at
some point in the XSLWG with regards to the XSLT function in the XPath function
namespace. However, I cannot find this back.

In XSLT 3.0 we have a provision that all possible functions *not* in the XPath
reserved namespace are mapped to an error function, to allow backwards
compatible processing. It's an edge case, but such backwards compatible
processing may lead to different results if different implementations have
differing sets of known function signatures.

That said, I think it is preferable to allow processors to have extension
functions in the reserved namespaces for precisely the reason you mention in
comment#6, last para.

I am not sure it makes sense to maintain this test the way it is written,
though it has helped us find gaps and overlap where we accidentally marked
certain functions with the wrong version attribute internally.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 6 August 2015 00:15:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:57:55 UTC