[Bug 27069] New: [XSLT30] Function signatures do not include namespace prefix

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

[Bug 27069] New: [XSLT30] Function signatures do not include namespace prefix

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27069

            Bug ID: 27069
           Summary: [XSLT30] Function signatures do not include namespace
                    prefix
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Last Call drafts
          Hardware: PC
                OS: Windows NT
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: XSLT 3.0
          Assignee: [hidden email]
          Reporter: [hidden email]
        QA Contact: [hidden email]

Probably editorial.

In XP30 it is customary to use the namespace prefix in the function signature.
Esp. now that we have functions both in the map and in the fn namespaces, I
think we should include the prefix in the signature as well (plus it makes
auto-generating a list of functions from the XHTML easier).

I.e., we have:

contains($map as map(*),
         $key as xs:anyAtomicType) as xs:boolean

which looks much like fn:contains, but is actually map:contains.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 27069] [XSLT30] Function signatures do not include namespace prefix

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27069

--- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <[hidden email]> ---
I'm reluctant. Partly because of the sheer amount of work and the inevitability
of errors (it can be automated for isolated references to functions, but not
for function calls within example code), and secondly because I don't think
it's a coding style I want to encourage. It just clutters the code and makes it
less readable. The default function namespace in XSLT is always the fn
namespace, so using the prefix is always redundant.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 27069] [XSLT30] Function signatures do not include namespace prefix

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
In reply to this post by Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27069

johnlumley <[hidden email]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[hidden email]

--- Comment #2 from johnlumley <[hidden email]> ---
Abel wrote:

... (plus it makes auto-generating a list of functions from the XHTML
easier)...

Having gone through a similar process when generating info for our
streamability analysis tool, where some of the tables in XSLT3.0 Section 19
were consulted semi-automatically, I'd rather encourage more use of attaching
information to declarative structures such as the function catalogs and
publishing them more systematically for such downstream purposes.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 27069] [XSLT30] Function signatures do not include namespace prefix

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
In reply to this post by Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27069

--- Comment #3 from Abel Braaksma <[hidden email]> ---
> and secondly because I don't think it's a coding style I want to encourage

Sorry, I think you misunderstand. It is not about coding style, it is about the
signatures of the functions. Not about examples, but about aligning those
signatures (one place for each function, either "fn:" or "map:") with the way
they are defined in FO30.

Similarly, we use map functions always with the map prefix (I believe it is not
even allowed otherwise) and currently we define it normatively without the map
prefix. While not wrong per se, it seems a bit at odds at least.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 27069] [XSLT30] Function signatures do not include namespace prefix

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
In reply to this post by Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27069

--- Comment #4 from Abel Braaksma <[hidden email]> ---
> I'd rather encourage more use of attaching information to declarative
> structures such as the function catalogs and publishing them more
> systematically for such downstream purposes.

(a bit OT) Well, it is a two-step process, where a controllable converter takes
an offline XHTML document and turns it into an XML list of functions. It is not
perfect, but the XHTML is well structured and there is little chance for
change.

The XML list of functions is small, clean and tidy and can henceforth be used
at a plethora of occasions. Currently, I agree, this can be done more
structurally and in one place, and I'll probably do so in the near future.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 27069] [XSLT30] Function signatures do not include namespace prefix

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
In reply to this post by Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27069

--- Comment #5 from Michael Kay <[hidden email]> ---
If you go into the CVS source, there is a function-catalog.xml which has all
the function data in structured form. (In fact there's one for the F+O
functions and another for the XSLT functions).

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 27069] [XSLT30] Function signatures do not include namespace prefix

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
In reply to this post by Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27069

Michael Kay <[hidden email]> changed:

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

--- Comment #6 from Michael Kay <[hidden email]> ---
The stylesheet changes to achieve this are being tested.

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