[Bug 26737] New: [xslt3.0] Editorial: accumulators

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 26737] New: [xslt3.0] Editorial: accumulators

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26737

            Bug ID: 26737
           Summary: [xslt3.0] Editorial: accumulators
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Working drafts
          Hardware: PC
                OS: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: XSLT 3.0
          Assignee: [hidden email]
          Reporter: [hidden email]
        QA Contact: [hidden email]

NOTE: the attribute xsl:accumulator-rule/@phase is optional, but I don't think
we define a default. I think phase="start" was intended (and is assumed in some
of our examples).

NOTE: the schema for XSLT 3.0 incorrectly permits xsl:accumulator/@post-descent

NOTE: the example in 18.2.4 appears to be incorrect. accumulator-before()
returns the pre-descent value of the accumulator, which is the value AFTER the
initial node visit. So to get the sequence 1,2,3, ... the initial value should
be zero. This also applies to the example in 18.2.5.

NOTE: the first example in 18.2.8 is not streamable, as it claims. It doesn't
have the attribute streamable="yes", and the select attribute on the
accumulator rule is not motionless.

NOTE: the last example in 18.2.8 has syntax problems. The first map:put() has
unmatched parens; the second has a colon that should be a comma. There also
seems to be a semantic problem: the accumulator is calling itself. I think the
body of the rule should be:

if (map:contains($value, @publisher))
       then map:put($value, @publisher, $value('publisher')+1 )
       else map:put($value, @publisher, 1)"/>


NOTE: we don't have any examples of accumulators calling each other. I think
Abel had a use case?

NOTE: for childless nodes, it appears that accumulator-before() and
accumulator-after() return the same value: the value after applying the
phase=start rules will always be the same as the value before applying the
phase=end rules.

NOTE: the names accumulator-before() and accumulator-after() are certainly
confusing. Consider the example in 18.2.8, where the meaning of the function
call accumulator-before('firstTitle') is to return the value of the first title
element.

NOTE: we might add a note that having a phase="end" rule that matches the
document node is useless, because there is no way of getting the final value.
Calling accumulator-after returns the value BEFORE applying the phase="end"
rules.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 26737] [xslt3.0] Editorial: accumulators

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26737

Michael Kay <[hidden email]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <[hidden email]> ---
Except for the absence of an example of accmulators invoking other
accumulators, these changes have been applied (editorially).

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.