From c56e88f83a5c5535e5c6c1979b0aac1ec365374f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Addison Phillips Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 08:28:54 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Define "option resolution" and require order to be insignificant This addresses concerns raised in #903 - define `option resolution` as a term - require that option order is not significant I was tempted to define the term `resolved options`, but held back. --- spec/formatting.md | 10 +++++++++- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/spec/formatting.md b/spec/formatting.md index f1a12cae0..ffdff11d3 100644 --- a/spec/formatting.md +++ b/spec/formatting.md @@ -333,7 +333,15 @@ Implementation-defined _functions_ SHOULD use an implementation-defined _namespa #### Option Resolution -The result of resolving _option_ values is an unordered mapping of string identifiers to values. +**_Option resolution_** is the process of computing the _options_ +for a given _expression_. +_Option resolution_ results in a mapping of string _identifiers_ to _values_. +The order of _options_ MUST NOT be significant. + +> For example, the following _message_ treats both both placeholders identically: +> ``` +> {$x :function option1=foo option2=bar} {$x :function option2=bar option1=foo} +> ``` For each _option_: