- From: Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 13:32:50 +0000
- To: Stefan Radomski <radomski@tk.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de>, "www-voice@w3.org (www-voice@w3.org)" <www-voice@w3.org>
Yes, I think that's a bug in the test. It should use the [@name=...] form. However I don't think that the short form ...[@name='scxml']... will work. It will have to be [@name='http://www.w3.org/TR/scxml/#SCXMLEventProcessor']. These long names for send types and event i/o processors are a nuisance. When we discussed this in the group, we thought that the W3C would want us to do something like this to guarantee that names were unique and unambiguous (and at least by using URIs we don't have to go through the bureaucratic hassle of adding names to a registry somewhere.) The spec does allow platforms to define short-form names in addition to the URIs, so that it's legal to support <send type='scxml'.../>, but you must also support the full url form. So your platform could have an entry <processor name="scxml".../>, but it must also support the full URL syntax. Since that's what's mandatory, I think that the test has to use it. I'll update the .xslt file. - Jim -----Original Message----- From: Stefan Radomski [mailto:radomski@tk.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de] Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 9:21 AM To: www-voice@w3.org (www-voice@w3.org) Subject: XPath expression in test568 Hi there, in test568, there is the following XPath expression: $_ioprocessors/scxml/location/text() Considering the draft, the XML structure at $_ioprocessors is supposed to be e.g.: <data id="_ioprocessors"> <processor name="http://www.w3.org/TR/scxml/#BasicHTTPEventProcessor"> <location>http://example.com/scxml-http/12345</location> </processor> <processor name="http://www.w3.org/TR/scxml/#SCXMLEventProcessor"> <location/> </processor> </data> I cannot see how the above xpath expression will fetch anything from this XML document and propose to replace it by: $_ioprocessors/processor[@name='scxml']/location/text() Is there some XPath magic or anything else I missed or is this just an error in the test? Best regards Stefan
Received on Friday, 12 April 2013 13:33:21 UTC