- From: Norm Tovey-Walsh <norm@saxonica.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 16:17:46 +0100
- To: public-xslt-40@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m234ziyu17.fsf@saxonica.com>
Hello, I assert that this email message discharges my action QT4CG-042-03: NW to consider revisions to query parses. The thrust of the action, I think, was to try to imagine how we might provide the ordered key/value pairs that were available in query-segments after implementing the group’s request to change that to a simple map named query-parameters. (See PR #696). Given …?a=1&b=2&a=3 We’re going to get "query-parameters": map { "a": ("1", "3"), "b": "2" } The description of how to reconstruct the query part of the URI in build-uri will naturally yield: …?a=1&a=3&b=2 I think that’s as close to “correctly” ordered as it is worth pursuing. In order to get the original order back, we’d have to have either a more complex data structure than a simple map (one example of which the group has already rejected), or we’d have to have a simple map *and* another data structure to track the order. I don’t think we have a use case that is compelling enough to justify that complexity. If a user really needs to be able to reconstruct “a=1&b=2&a=3”, I think the’ll have to do it themselves (which is always possible). Be seeing you, norm -- Norm Tovey-Walsh Saxonica
Received on Wednesday, 13 September 2023 15:25:52 UTC