This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 10864 - [XQuery30] Wrong description of function annotation prefixes in section 4.15
Summary: [XQuery30] Wrong description of function annotation prefixes in section 4.15
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
Classification: Unclassified
Component: XQuery 3.0 (show other bugs)
Version: Member-only Editors Drafts
Hardware: PC Windows NT
: P2 minor
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jonathan Robie
QA Contact: Mailing list for public feedback on specs from XSL and XML Query WGs
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-09-30 15:54 UTC by Oliver Hallam
Modified: 2011-09-10 19:39 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description Oliver Hallam 2010-09-30 15:54:32 UTC
Section 4.15 contains the following sentence:

Annotations are (QName, value) pairs. If the EQName of the annotation is a lexical QName, the prefix of the QName is resolved using the statically known namespaces; if no prefix is present, the name is in the default function namespace. The XQuery family of languages define annotations in the fn namespace. Assuming this the default element namespace is fn, the annotations %private and %fn:private both have the same annotation name.

This last sentence has a number of problems:
* The word "this" should be "that"
* "default element namespace" should read "default function namespace"
* Where it says "fn" it means "the fn namespace", or better yet "http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions"
* There should be an additional restriction "and the fn prefix is bound to 'http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions'".

Applying all these changes:

"Assuming that the default function namespace is bound to its default value of "http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions" and the fn prefix is also bound to its default value of "http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions", the annotations %private and %fn:private both have the same annotation name.

But after fixing this sentence it seems a little cumbersome, almost to the point of being useless!
Comment 1 Jonathan Robie 2011-09-10 19:39:37 UTC
(In reply to comment #0)

> But after fixing this sentence it seems a little cumbersome, almost to the
> point of being useless!

I agree. I deleted it.