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 24050 - [XT3TS] Invalid test package-901
Summary: [XT3TS] Invalid test package-901
Alias: None
Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
Classification: Unclassified
Component: XSLT 3.0 Test Suite (show other bugs)
Version: Working drafts
Hardware: PC Windows NT
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Abel Braaksma
QA Contact: Mailing list for public feedback on specs from XSL and XML Query WGs
Depends on:
Reported: 2013-12-10 14:26 UTC by Vitaliy
Modified: 2015-05-06 21:19 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Description Vitaliy 2013-12-10 14:26:08 UTC
The test verifies that required @name attribute is defined. But according to the working draft @name attribute is optional, and must be defined only in the case when package will be used by other package. 

The test should probably be removed.
Comment 1 Abel Braaksma 2013-12-13 00:42:57 UTC
Hmm, if I recall correctly, it became optional to allow the principal stylesheet to be a package-in-disguise, otherwise the hidden xsl:package element above xsl:stylesheet would require a name, which is redundant. 

When a package is used by the principal stylesheet, it is in effect used by a package (disguised as the principal stylesheet). Hence, once the @name attribute isn't there, a package cannot be used by either another package that has the xsl:package declaration, or by a stylesheet, that has an xsl:package declaration implicitly.

That being said, if an unnamed package is semantically equivalent with a stylesheet having xsl:stylesheet at its root, would it be allowed with xsl:import/include?
Comment 2 Abel Braaksma 2013-12-13 01:27:07 UTC
Correction on the previous comment: the current rules state that only stylesheets containing one ore more xsl:package declarations will be a "simplified package".

And Vitaliy is correct in that the @name attribute is optional, so test package-901 can be removed or updated.
Comment 3 Abel Braaksma 2015-03-28 16:09:49 UTC
Fixed by renaming test to package-002 and expecting non-error outcome.
Comment 4 Abel Braaksma 2015-05-06 21:19:35 UTC
Was resolved > 30 days ago, closing.