- From: Rui Lopes <rlopes@di.fc.ul.pt>
- Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 01:36:52 +0100
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
I'd like to propose a more flexible way to handle errors, in comparison
to the status quo.
My proposal is a small addition to the p:catch element: an optional
@code attribute with the same semantics of p:error's code option. This
would allow a pipeline author to catch just a specific error, instead of
catching any error, handling it appropriately in situ. Other errors
would be caught by outer p:try/p:catch blocks.
A simple skeleton example:
<p:try>
<p:group>
...
</p:group>
<p:catch code="err:XD0001">
...
</p:catch>
</p:try>
If such mechanism is allowed, then I would like to propose a small
change to p:try's syntax to enable multiple p:catch elements. Authors
would have a way to produce cleaner error handling markup by avoiding
having to use a p:choose inside the p:catch to achieve the same effect.
A skeleton example:
<p:try>
<p:group>
...
</p:group>
<p:catch code="err:XD0001">
...
</p:catch>
<p:catch code="err:XD0002">
...
</p:catch>
</p:try>
On a side note, should we define error codes for each step (both
required and optional ones), or leave it as implementation defined? I
think it would be somewhat verbose to describe them (e.g., all errors
for XSLT 2.0), but it would provide us a thinner control of pipelines -
and interoperable - using my @code proposal.
Thoughts?
Rui
Received on Tuesday, 10 July 2007 00:37:14 UTC