- From: mozer <xmlizer@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 20:40:22 +0100
- To: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
- Cc: "timeless@gmail.com" <timeless@gmail.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
well I wonder why this regex disallow all multiple of 10 signature10.xml is not possible any more Xmlizer On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com> wrote: > I see, perhaps we can combine the text I proposed with a variant on the bnf > you mentioned; > > signature[0-9]*[1-9].xml > > and add to my proposal the additional text: > > If a widget resource contains signatures that are not consistent in the > number of digits in the names then the result of ordering will be > implementation dependent. > > regards, Frederick > > Frederick Hirsch > Nokia > > > > On Mar 5, 2009, at 12:03 PM, ext timeless wrote: > >> On Mar 5, 2009, at 9:15 AM, I wrote: >>> >>> The proposal is to only allow [1-9][0-9]*, which should solve this. >> >> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Frederick Hirsch >> <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com> wrote: >>> >>> This does not seem quite right since it requires 10 or more signatures? >>> >>> e.g. disallows signature01.xml, signature02.xml etc >>> and requires signature10.xml etc >> >> I'm not certain about the []* notation. >> >> I was hoping for <leading non-zero digit> and <0 or more digits> >> >>> I propose the following alternative in section 5.3 >>> >>> Naming convention for a distributor signature:"signature" [0-9]* ".xml" >>> >>> Every distributor signature MUST have the same number of digits in the >>> file >>> name and use leading zeros for numbers less than the maximum numeric >>> value. >>> This is to enable consistent sorting. >>> >>> To give an example, if nine distributor signatures are expected the >>> numbers >>> should range from 01 to 09, e.g. signature01.xml to signature09.xml. >>> --- >>> >>> Does this make sense? >> >> That'd work too, and i suppose would be easier on a sorter since it >> could do an alpha sort. >> Although you need to explain what to do if there are only >> signature01.xml and signature1.xml, does the engine always favor the >> longest string and ignore all shorter sets? >> >> Either way, validators need instructions, for yours it would need to >> warn about signatures which have the wrong number of digits. > > >
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 19:41:02 UTC