30230 2018-03-17 22:52:46 +0000 [XSLT30] Pattern grammar requires at least one argument for rooted expressions, but root() must be used without any 2019-02-15 12:20:12 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XPath / XQuery / XSLT XSLT 3.0 Recommendation PC Windows NT NEW P2 normal --- 1 abel.online mike public-qt-comments oldest_to_newest 129089 0 abel.online 2018-03-17 22:52:46 +0000 I'm refactoring parts of the pattern parser, which lead to this and the previous report. We define a rooted pattern with a function call as: FunctionCallP ::= OuterFunctionName ArgumentListP OuterFunctionName ::= "doc" | "id" | "element-with-id" | "key" | "root" | ... And arguments as: ArgumentListP ::= "(" (ArgumentP ("," ArgumentP)*)? ")" But in the text we say: "In the case of a call to the rootFO30 function, the argument list must be empty: that is, only the zero-arity form of the function is allowed." So I think the prose is not in line with the grammar, or vice versa. Since I was curious where this ArgumentListP grammar came from, I traced the cause of this back to a mail from March 2013 [1], which fixed an ambiguity issue with the grammar parser by requiring at least one argument. This was fine at the time, because the fn:root() function wasn't allowed yet. However, after we added the fn:root() function, this fix doesn't work anymore. I don't think there's a really big issue here, except that a literal interpretation of the grammar (which is what it is supposed to be used for, I think), would make a valid call like match="root()/x" invalid. I propose we add a note and a proposed fix to an erratum. [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xsl-query/2013Mar/0070.html 129504 1 mike 2019-02-15 12:20:12 +0000 I don't see a bug here. The grammar ArgumentListP ::= "(" (ArgumentP ("," ArgumentP)*)? ")" permits an empty argument list. (Sadly, I no longer have access to the member-only email archive)