- 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