- From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 08:52:56 -0800
- To: "public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org" <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>
On further reflection and discussion with others, I'm OK with the current strategy for fragment identifiers. On 11/12/07, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> wrote: > We have a number of places where the 'name' attribute is provided. In some > cases it is just for providing a way to have a fragment identifier. > > For p:declare-step, p:when, p:otherwise, and p:pipeline-library, we say nothing > about this attribute even though the declaration shows that such an attribute is > allowed. > > Further, for all cases where the fragment identifier is allowed, we say nothing > about its uniqueness. In particular, it would be very easy for a > pipeline author > to use the same name attribute value on a p:when that they uses for a step. In > both cases the name attribute value is a fragment identifier and will cause an > ambiguity as to which construct is the target of the URI. > > Even further, if the same name value is used on two steps in the same > scope, it is > an error but if the same name value is used on a step and one of the other > constructs (e.g. p:when or p:declare-step) that can have a fragment identifier > it is not an error. This seems inconsistent. > > I think it would be better to say that in all cases the named construct is added > to the "in-scope" names so that conflicts can be detected. When you refer to > something that you can't, you'd just get a different static error (e.g. you can > refer to a port on a p:declare-step via its name). > > -- > --Alex Milowski > "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the > inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language > considered." > > Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics > -- --Alex Milowski "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language considered." Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2008 16:53:31 UTC