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 29258 - [QT3TS] omitted Expr in EnclosedExpr
Summary: [QT3TS] omitted Expr in EnclosedExpr
Alias: None
Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
Classification: Unclassified
Component: XQuery 3 & XPath 3 Test Suite (show other bugs)
Version: Candidate Recommendation
Hardware: All All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: O'Neil Delpratt
QA Contact: Mailing list for public feedback on specs from XSL and XML Query WGs
Depends on:
Reported: 2015-11-03 16:38 UTC by Michael Dyck
Modified: 2016-03-09 22:54 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:


Description Michael Dyck 2015-11-03 16:38:01 UTC
In the resolution of Bug 29185, XQuery 3.1 has changed {Expr} to {Expr?} at various points in the grammar. So a few tests that were illegal in older versions are legal in XQuery 3.1. Consequently, the following tests should be split into 3.1 and pre-3.1 versions, with different expectations:

Comment 1 Josh Spiegel 2015-11-06 17:52:38 UTC
Also this one:
Comment 2 Michael Dyck 2015-11-06 21:57:12 UTC
(In reply to Josh Spiegel from comment #1)
> Also this one:
> prod/DirElemContent.xml#K2-DirectConElemContent-26

No, K2-DirectConElemContent-26 is only for XQ10 and XQ30.
The XQ31+ version is K2-DirectConElemContent-26a
Comment 3 Josh Spiegel 2015-11-06 22:36:26 UTC
Yes, you are right. I was looking at the github mirror ( which appears to have stopped updating back in October.  This test was fixed recently.
Comment 4 Christian Gruen 2015-12-02 10:33:04 UTC
(In reply to Josh Spiegel from comment #3)
> Yes, you are right. I was looking at the github mirror
> ( which appears to have stopped
> updating back in October.

Thanks for the reminder. Since today, the mirror is updated again.
Comment 5 Josh Spiegel 2015-12-02 17:24:26 UTC
Thanks! I have found it very useful when searching for tests and looking at change history.
Comment 6 O'Neil Delpratt 2015-12-15 16:01:02 UTC
I have added new test case which are variants of the ones suggested in comment #0. Committed to cvs
Comment 7 Michael Kay 2016-03-09 22:54:17 UTC
I have corrected the expected results of


(It should produce a comment with zero-length content. For some reason text{} produces an empty sequence but comment{} produces a zero-length comment node.)