- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 23:59:46 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29891 Bug ID: 29891 Summary: [XP31] Prepublication check of XP31: Appendices Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT Version: Candidate Recommendation Hardware: PC OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: XPath 3.1 Assignee: jonathan.robie@gmail.com Reporter: mike@saxonica.com QA Contact: public-qt-comments@w3.org Target Milestone: --- 1. The first sentence of A.1.1 ("The following definitions will be helpful in defining precisely this exposition.") is ghastly and can simply be deleted. Readers can judge for themselves whether the definitions are helpful. 2. A.1.2 says "Therefore to reduce the need for lookahead, if the token immediately following a slash can form the start of a RelativePathExpr, then the slash must be the beginning of a PathExpr, not the entirety of it." This implies that the rule is only needed to avoid the need for lookahead. However, it is also needed to disambiguate expressions like "/union/*" where there are two valid interpretations which cannot be distinguished by any amount of lookahead. 3. A.1.2 says "Unprefixed function names spelled the same way as language keywords could make the language harder to recognize.". For "harder" read "impossible" (and for "recognize" read "parse"). Without this rule the expression "element(foo)" would be ambiguous. 4. A.4, row 20, is I believe using "?" to mean the binary/postfix lookup operator. The unary lookup operator has highest precedence of all and should perhaps be in a new row 21. 5. In B.2 para 1, the sentence "In some cases, the operator function does not implement the full semantics of a given operator." is misleading. I think it should say "The operator function fully defines the semantics of a given operator for the case where the operands are single atomic values of the types given in the table". 6. In the operator mapping table, the entries where xs:anyURI is one of the types are redundant, since the entry for xs:string suffices (and fortunately is always the same) - the rules say that the anyURI can be promoted to xs:string to find the applicable entry in the table. 7. E.1 Inconsistent use of space within entries like "RFC 2119" or "RFC3986". 8. XQuery 3.0 is listed in the non-normative references, but the document does not refer to XQuery 3.0. 9. Ditto for Document Object Model. 10. Ditto for XPath 2.0 11. There is a non-normative reference to XPath 3.1. It is not usual for a specification to refer non-normatively to itself. 12. It is not clear what purpose the references in E.3 (Background material) serve 13. In Appendix F, error XQST0052, it's not clear what construct this refers to. Change to "The type *named in a cast or castable expression* must be... 14. The description of error XQST0070 includes conditions that cannot arise in XPath. 15. Error XPST0080, missing comma after NOTATION. 16. The description of XPDY0130 is the only place it suggests that limits are implementation-defined. If a conformant implementation is required to document its limits, this is not the right place to say so. 17. Error XPST0133 is an orphan. 18. Appendix G: the glossary should be sorted using a caseblind collation. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 3 October 2016 23:59:54 UTC