- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 01:12:33 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29983 --- Comment #12 from Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl> --- Sorry, I meant with "used to have the term *equivalent expression*" to be w.r.t. the previous section 19.1, which led to a lot of debate. Bug 24490 contains the summary of the Prague WG F2F where we discussed the problems of rewriting expressions, which was then a part of the streamability rules in a more general sense. Since this only applies to a (subset of) RelativePathExpr, it is very well possible that the concerns there do not apply anymore, even more so if we are now talking about the situation where a RelativePathExpr is lexically equivalent with a Pattern30 production (as opposed to the result of a rewrite). This will exclude some expressions that are potentially streamable, but I think they aren't streamable by our rules now either (like x/.//y, current()//x/y). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 19 November 2016 01:12:40 UTC