Quantcast

[Bug 27300] New: [XSLT30] Simplified package visibility of components, esp. xsl:function

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[Bug 27300] New: [XSLT30] Simplified package visibility of components, esp. xsl:function

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27300

            Bug ID: 27300
           Summary: [XSLT30] Simplified package visibility of components,
                    esp. xsl:function
           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]

This was initially brought to attention by Dimitre Novatchev (see
http://www.biglist.com/lists/lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/archives/201411/msg00078.html).

The transformation for simplified packages does not include xsl:function and so
does not make its implicit visibility public, even though it is a callable
component:

 <xsl:transform version="3.0"
    xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"
    xmlns:t="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/TransformAlias">

    <xsl:namespace-alias stylesheet-prefix="t" result-prefix="xsl"/>

    <xsl:template match="xsl:stylesheet|xsl:transform">
      <t:package declared-modes="no">
        <xsl:copy-of select="@*"/>
        <t:expose component="mode" names="*" visibility="public"/>
        <t:expose component="template" names="*" visibility="public"/>
        <xsl:copy-of select="node()"/>
      </t:package>
    </xsl:template>
 </xsl:transform>

Other components not included are xsl:accumulator and xsl:variable. Even if
their intentional implicit visibility is private, perhaps it still makes sense
to make that explicit in the transformation, if anything, then just to forgo
the perceived ambiguity mentioned in Dimitre's mail.

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

Loading...