29997 2016-11-10 23:28:25 +0000 [QT3TS] many fn-transform tests could work in XPath? 2017-04-07 22:16:51 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XPath / XQuery / XSLT XQuery 3 & XPath 3 Test Suite Working drafts All All RESOLVED FIXED P2 normal --- 1 jmdyck oneil mike public-qt-comments oldest_to_newest 128141 0 jmdyck 2016-11-10 23:28:25 +0000 (Follow-up to Bug 29993) In fn/transform.xml, many test-cases are marked <dependency type="spec" value="XQ31+"/> which excludes them from consideration by XPath processors. Formerly, this was necessary because their test-queries used XQuery-specific syntax. However, after changes to the file from Michael Kay and myself (under bug 29993), almost all of their test-queries are now syntactically valid XPath expressions. Is there any other reason to retain the exclusion? Specifically, ... For these, the test-query is syntactically valid XPath: fn-transform-6 fn-transform-7 fn-transform-9 fn-transform-10 fn-transform-11 fn-transform-12 fn-transform-13 fn-transform-13a fn-transform-18 fn-transform-22 fn-transform-33 fn-transform-37 fn-transform-44 fn-transform-48 fn-transform-50 fn-transform-51 fn-transform-52 fn-transform-53 fn-transform-54 fn-transform-55 fn-transform-56 fn-transform-57 fn-transform-58 fn-transform-60 fn-transform-61 fn-transform-62 fn-transform-63 fn-transform-err-2 fn-transform-err-3 fn-transform-err-4 fn-transform-err-5 fn-transform-err-6 fn-transform-err-9 fn-transform-err-9a fn-transform-err-15 fn-transform-err-16 fn-transform-902 For these, I think the test-query could be easily tweaked to use XPath syntax: fn-transform-26 fn-transform-27 fn-transform-32 fn-transform-64 The only two that are not so easy are: fn-transform-2 due to use of "element {...}" fn-transform-19 due to use of "declare base-uri" 128523 1 mike 2017-04-07 22:16:51 +0000 I have modified these tests (except -2 and -19) to run under XPath 3.1 Still sorting out some CVS conflicts...