3061 2006-03-30 13:32:05 +0000 inconsistent treatment of the absence of declarations in Section 4 of the XQuery Rec. 2006-04-22 00:39:51 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XPath / XQuery / XSLT XQuery 1.0 Candidate Recommendation Other Linux CLOSED FIXED P3 minor --- 1 pichler chamberl pichler public-qt-comments oldest_to_newest 8977 0 pichler 2006-03-30 13:32:05 +0000 In my eyes, the preferred formulation for the behavior in case of the absence of some kind of declaration is the one given e.g. in Section 4.3 (Boundary Space Declaration). Here it says: "A boundary-space declaration sets... overriding any implementation-defined default". In Sections 4.5 (Base URI Declaration) and 4.8 (Empty Order Declaration), it is not specified what happens if no such declaration is given. I would expect an analogous sentence as the one in Section 4.3, i.e. "A ... declaration sets... overriding any implementation-defined default". In Section 4.13 (Default Namespace Declaration) it is not specified what happens if no default element/type namespace declaration is given. Again, I would expect an analogous sentence as the one in Section 4.3, i.e. "A ... declaration sets... overriding any implementation-defined default". In Section 4.9 (Copy-Namespaces Declaration) it says "A ... declaration sets... overwriting any implementation-defined default". Changing "overwriting" to "overriding" would be preferable. In Section 4.13 (Default Namespace Declaration) the behavior in case of the absence of a default function namespace declaration is specified as follows: "If no default function namespace declaration is present, the default function namespace is the namespace of XPath/XQuery functions, http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions (however, this default may be overridden by an implementation.)" This formulation is confusing. If the implementation may override this default, then the default function namespace is simply "implementation-defined". Again, the analogous formulation as in Section 4.3 is preferable. 9403 1 chamberl 2006-04-22 00:39:37 +0000 Reinhard, Thank you for your comment. The Query Working Group considered your comment on April 3, 2006 and agreed that more editorial consistency would be desirable in the sections you identified. I have made editorial changes to make these sections more consistent. Note also that the hierarchy of defaults for each static context component is specified in Appendix C. Since these changes are of an editorial nature, I have marked this Bugzilla entry as Fixed and Closed. When you see the next XQuery working draft, if you have further comments, you may of course open a new Bugzilla entry. Regards, Don Chamberlin (for the Query Working Group)