- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 17:22:54 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29472 --- Comment #5 from Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl> --- > then we might consider these as additional values of "streamable": > streamable="yes-strict" > streamable="yes-fallback" > streamable="yes-optimistic" In principle I am in favor of such an option (esp. since we already offer optimistic streaming, though the option is not documented yet), but I'm also hesitant, as I'd rather have the stylesheet as a whole be analyzed/processed as strict/fallback/optimistic. I'd also favor any library package to have to be strict (for compatibility reasons), but that may be both an unnecessary restriction and/or hard to define in spec prose. For consideration then, I would like to suggest (xsl:package|xsl:stylesheet)/streamability-level = "strict | fallback | optimistic", or something of that kind, which is easier to implement at this stage than trying to define interactions of the several constructs if one is strict and the other is optimistic. If library packages must be strict and import precedence is not an issue (only the principle stylesheet module counts) then I think this could work without being too much of a change, and it relieves the stress of Rule 1: Raising a static error. Since fallback and optimistic are implementation-defined, we could define this such that only "strict" is required. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 20 February 2016 17:22:57 UTC