- From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 12:37:31 -0700
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
(fixes are checked in but not online yet) On 8/10/07, Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> wrote: > > Remove unneeded sequence="no" in p:add-attribute Fixed. > > Please add sequence="yes" to output port=result in p:add-xml-base or > remove it from input port="source" I think this should not allow sequences on input to be consistent with out policy of not creating steps that operate upon a document but do implicit iteration. I've removed sequence="yes" from the source. > > Rephrase second bullet > > [[ > If the element is the document element and *there is no explicit has > no xml:base attribute*, an xml:base attribute is added with the value > set to the element's base URI. > ]] > see between stars Fixed. > > It seems option=all need to have a default value to 'no', and > option=relative also I think it would be better to have the 'relative' option default to 'yes'. I most cases the combination of all='no' and relative='yes' should result in a document with a single xml:base attribute on the document element with an absolute URI of the document's location. Otherwise, this is fixed. > > -- > In p:directory-list > Why is filter a Regex ? It needs to be a pattern of some sort so you can match "*.xml" or "*.xhtml", right? The F&O document from XPath 2.0 already specifies how patterns as regular expressions work. Otherwise, we'd have to find another specification to point at and I don't see a reason to do that since we already use the F&O document elsewhere. > -- > In p:insert > Now that there is no default for position, It needs to be required="yes" I agree. Fixed. > > -- > In p:label > Please remove the first line (redundant) and the unneeded "and the step fails" > [[ > If an existing xml:id value conflicts with a previously generated > value, the step fails. > > It is a dynamic error (err:XC0006) if an existing xml:id value > conflicts with a previously generated value and the step fails. > ]] Ah... forgot to delete the old text. Fixed. > -- > In p:namespace-rename > Please rephrase this sentence > [[ > If the from option is the empty string, or is not specified, then > elements and attributes in no namespace are renamed. If the to option > is the empty string, or is not specified, then elements and attributes > in the specified from namespace are renamed into no namespace. > ]] I've made the language a bit cleaner. I found a problem in this step that I fixed in that if you rename the no namespace you'd probably rename every attribute and that's probably not what you wanted. I've fixed this by adding a 'elements-only' option. Also, there was a dynamic error for this step that wasn't called out properly that I fixed. > -- > In p:parameters > All the c:parameter points to p:parameter, please fix it > > as with p:document/p:documentation, I suggest to find another name for this step Not fixed yet... need to check with Norm about where he wants to describe those elements as they appear many places. > -- > In p:rename > > I think we should narrow the error XC009 to target only the validity > of the name option > [[ > It is a dynamic error (err:XC0009) if the specified name is not a > valid name or if the renaming would introduce a syntactic error into > the document (i.e., if it would create two attributes with the same > name on the same element). > ]] > to > [[ > It is a dynamic error (err:XC0009) if the specified name is not a valid QName > ]] The restriction of having two attributes of the same name needs to remain. I've made it a separate error. I've added the QName bit to the error. > For the matter of validity, if we want to keep such level of detail, > we need to provide the same for each step (which could be a huge task) > > We already know that if the document is not namespace aware well > formed, it will be a XD0001 error (note en passant that XD0001 is not > as precise at it should) Our documents are based on infosets and so are namespace aware. > > -- > In p:set-attributes > you need to provide a default value for match or make it required="yes" > > Note en passant, that all match option are not consistant in each steps > > -- I made it required as all the others are required. > > In p:serialization > > "The encoding must support the values UTF-8 or UTF-16." > > Please replace "or" by "and" (UTF-8 should be mandatory) I think we should just require UTF-8 and skip all the others. Any implementation expected to work in many ideographic languages is going to support UTF-16 or UTF-32 or some non-standard encoding. UTF-8 is sufficient to encode those languages even though it results in a much a larger document. > > "The omit-xml-declaration must support be supported. If the value is > not specified or has the value no, an XML declaration must be > produced." > > please correct "must support be supported". Also, Is the > omit-xml-declaration="yes" mandatory (your phrasing is not enough > clear) Correct? That's the language directly from the serialization spec. -- --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 Monday, 13 August 2007 19:48:52 UTC