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 11701 - [XQTS] incorrect expectation of XPST0003 (parse error)
Summary: [XQTS] incorrect expectation of XPST0003 (parse error)
Status: RESOLVED MOVED
Alias: None
Product: XML Query Test Suite
Classification: Unclassified
Component: XML Query Test Suite (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All Windows 3.1
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Benjamin Nguyen
QA Contact: Mailing list for public feedback on specs from XSL and XML Query WGs
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-01-09 01:42 UTC by Michael Dyck
Modified: 2016-04-12 14:41 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description Michael Dyck 2011-01-09 01:42:45 UTC 
Test-cases:
    modules-pub-priv-{1,2,3,4} and map-903
all have
    <expected-error spec-version="1.0">XPST0003</expected-error>
but this is incorrect, as the queries are all valid instances of the XQuery 1.0 grammar. Those lines should be deleted from the catalog.

(All the test-cases also have
    <expected-error spec-version="1.0">XQST0031</expected-error>
which is correct.)

Also, test-case
    K2-DirectConElem-53
has
    <expected-error>XPST0003</expected-error>
which is correct for XQuery 1.0, but not 3.0. The query is:
    namespace {"p"} {"abc"}
which is a valid instance of the 3.0 grammar. (But here I'm not sure what the expected results *should* be.)
Comment 1 Benjamin Nguyen 2011-01-25 14:08:08 UTC 
Hi Michael,

could you open another bug for the second part of your report (i.e. correct 1.0 syntax but wrong 3.0 syntax), because I think that it might stem some discussion whereas the first part of the bug report is rather straightforward.

For the first part of your bug report XQST0003 may have been blindly added on many cases where XQST0031 was raised. Since Mike Kay is the author of this bug maybe he can give his rationale.
Comment 2 Michael Dyck 2011-01-25 20:02:22 UTC 
(In reply to comment #1)
> 
> could you open another bug for the second part of your report

Okay, that's now Bug 11866.

> (i.e. correct 1.0 syntax but wrong 3.0 syntax),

(It's actually the other way round.)
Comment 3 O'Neil Delpratt 2016-04-12 14:41:23 UTC 
This bug has been resolved against the QT3 test suite therefore I am marking it as resolved.