1520 2005-07-03 18:19:49 +0000 Editorial & Suggestion: distinguish different QNames in EBNF 2006-09-18 10:41:34 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XPath / XQuery / XSLT XPath 2.0 Last Call drafts Other Linux CLOSED FIXED P2 minor --- 1 frans.englich scott_boag public-qt-comments oldest_to_newest 4419 0 frans.englich 2005-07-03 18:19:50 +0000 Hi, As known, QNames receives different treatment depending on context -- what default namespace that should be used. This could be communicated in the EBNF by having two rules that both expand to the QName token, referenced from the appropriate productions. An example: FunctionQName ::= QName ElementQName ::= QName NameTest ::= ElementQName | Wildcard FunctionCall ::= <FunctionQName "("> (ExprSingle ("," ExprSingle)*)? ")" ... I would find the grammar useful in that way; the question is if that should be valued higher than the increased complexity, and change in EBNF at this stage of development. But it is also nothing more than a suggestion. Cheers, Frans 4473 1 scott_boag 2005-07-09 21:23:37 +0000 (In reply to comment #0) I don't believe that our grammar need be designed to reflect this kind of semantics processing. The author of the comment should feel free to organize his own grammar/parser in this way since the change has no external effect. 4504 2 frans.englich 2005-07-11 14:23:05 +0000 I see a resemblance to how variable names are distinguished by the VarName construct. But this is really minor, I wouldn't object if it got closed. Cheers, Frans 5176 3 scott_boag 2005-07-22 20:45:37 +0000 A joint meeting of the Query and XSLT working groups considered this comment on July 20, 2005. The WG agreed to resolve this issue as per my previous comment. If you do not agree with this resolution, please add a comment explaining why. If you wish to appeal the WG's decision to the Director, then change the Status of the record to Reopened. If we do not hear from you in the next two weeks, we will assume you agree with the WG decision.