- 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