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 22434 - [FO30] Whitespace in variable markers
Summary: [FO30] Whitespace in variable markers
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
Classification: Unclassified
Component: XQuery 3 & XPath 3 Test Suite (show other bugs)
Version: Candidate Recommendation
Hardware: PC Windows NT
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: O'Neil Delpratt
QA Contact: Mailing list for public feedback on specs from XSL and XML Query WGs
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2013-06-24 09:18 UTC by Tim Mills
Modified: 2015-01-03 00:15 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description Tim Mills 2013-06-24 09:18:27 UTC
F&O3.0 states in 9.8.4.1 The picture string

"Whitespace within a variable marker is ignored."

Since the variable marker may contain a "first presentation modifier", which may be

"... any format token permitted as a primary format token in the second argument of the fn:format-integer function"

and whitespace might form a part of such a primary format token (e.g. as a grouping separator), is this correct?

I'm not sure there are any tests covering whitespace in the picture string, such as the following:

format-date(xs:date('2034-01-02'), "[ Y 9 999  ]")
Comment 1 Michael Kay 2013-06-24 11:48:40 UTC
Thanks for reporting it. Given that the same text was present in XSLT 2.0, I'm inclined to say that we should take it to mean what it says: whitespace is stripped from the variable marker before you do anything else, which means using space as a grouping separator is not possible. That's not the spec I would write if I were writing it today, but it's hard to argue that it's unclear or contradictory.
Comment 2 Tim Mills 2013-06-24 13:02:22 UTC
In that case, I'll convert it to a bug against the test suite as a reminder that whitespace in variable markers appears not to be covered.

If you concur that

format-date(xs:date('2034-01-02'), "[ Y 9 999  ]")

is

'2034'

I'll add it to the test suite in due course.
Comment 3 Michael Kay 2015-01-03 00:15:42 UTC
I've added test case format-date-028 to test this condition.