Add Resolved Values and Function Handler sections to formatting #728
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -269,7 +269,7 @@ a reference to a function which cannot be resolved. | |
| ### Bad Selector | ||
|
|
||
| A **_<dfn>Bad Selector</dfn>_** error occurs when a message includes a _selector_ | ||
| with a _resolved value_ which does not support selection. | ||
|
|
||
| > For example, attempting to format this message | ||
| > would result in a _Bad Selector_ error: | ||
|
|
@@ -283,10 +283,10 @@ with a resolved value which does not support selection. | |
| ## Message Function Errors | ||
|
|
||
| A **_<dfn>Message Function Error</dfn>_** is any error that occurs | ||
| when calling a _function handler_ | ||
| or which depends on validation associated with a specific function. | ||
|
|
||
| Implementations SHOULD provide a way for _function handlers_ to emit | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. I couldn't find a definition of what a "function handler" is. Which file is that in? There was a problem hiding this comment. It's added by this PR to There was a problem hiding this comment. I don't see a definition; just references. There was a problem hiding this comment. Here's a link to the section in this PR's branch: https://github.com/unicode-org/message-format-wg/blob/define-resolved-values/spec/formatting.md#function-handler |
||
| (or cause to be emitted) any of the types of error defined in this section. | ||
| Implementations MAY also provide implementation-defined _Message Function Error_ types. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
@@ -300,7 +300,7 @@ Implementations MAY also provide implementation-defined _Message Function Error_ | |
| > 3. Uses a `:get` message function which requires its argument to be an object and | ||
| > an option `field` to be provided with a string value. | ||
| > | ||
| > The exact type of _Message Function Error_ is determined by the _function handler_. | ||
| > | ||
| > ``` | ||
| > Hello, {horse :get field=name}! | ||
|
|
||
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm confused. Can you give an example of a selector that supports selection where its resolved value doesn't?
That is, if I have
.input {$num :number}
.match $num
...
How could :number ever have a resolved value that didn't support selection? I think the notion of 'resolved value' doesn't help.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Going with the example you posted above, if that message is formatted without a
numargument, then the first step of Function Resolution applies:And then this part of Fallback Resolution applies:
And so we end up emitting two errors when formatting:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think @macchiati's finger is on the right thing. It's not a technical problem. This is just hard to understand. Perhaps:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could we spin this suggestion off into a separate PR? As is, the only change that is being applied here is linkifying resolved value.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Works for me as a solution.