- From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 06:40:52 -0700
- To: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Cc: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com>, Carine Bournez <carine@w3.org>, public-xsl-wg@w3.org
> On Dec 8, 2016, at 3:06 AM, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> wrote: > >> >> Mike Kay seems to advocate for a much more radical change, that is closer >> to dropping GS entirely > > > Absolutely not. I think it is extremely useful to define a set of constructs that is guaranteed streamable in every (streaming) processor, even if there is no requirement for every processor to report whether a particular construct is within that subset or not. > > It's very analogous to our rules on limits. We require processors to handle decimals with 16 digits, but we don't require them to report when a stylesheet is using decimals with more than 16 digits, and is thus straying outside the realm of guaranteed interoperability. > I agree that the situations are analogous. The difference seems to me to be that it’s not hard for me as a user to count the number of digits required for a value and see whether it’s greater than or less than sixteen, without assistance from software. I do not believe the definition of guaranteed-streamable constructs is simple enough to apply reliably by hand. ******************************************** C. M. Sperberg-McQueen Black Mesa Technologies LLC cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com http://www.blackmesatech.com ********************************************
Received on Thursday, 8 December 2016 13:41:26 UTC