- From: Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:11:14 +0100 (BST)
- To: "Innovimax SARL" <innovimax@gmail.com>, "Richard Tobin" <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
> <step name="A"> > <step name="inside">...</step> > </step> > <step name="B"> > <step name="inside">...</step> > </step> > > is allowed by the current spec, not with your change, IMHO Ok, I was misinterpreting the wording: > > The scope of the names of the steps themselves is determined by the > > environment of each step. In general, the name of a step, the names of > > its sibling steps, the names of any steps that it contains directly, > > the names of its ancestors, and the names of its ancestor's siblings > > are all in the same scope. My interpretation was: the first inside is in the same scope as A, the second is in the same scope as B, and A and B are in the same scope, so by transitivity the two insides are in the same scope. I suggest changing "in the same scope" to "in a common scope". -- Richard
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2007 16:11:39 UTC