W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > April 2004

Re: typing of integer operations in Xpath2

From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 13:19:24 +0100
Message-Id: <200404201219.NAA04877@penguin.nag.co.uk>
To: mhk@mhk.me.uk
Cc: public-qt-comments@w3.org


> and I agree with you that this particular problem
> which arises when (@colspan+1) returns a double rather than an integer is
> one that we ought to fix.

I'm glad to hear that.

> (The other one I would like to fix is that
> concat() should implicitly convert its arguments to strings - even Java does
> this).

That would be useful, but why just concat? Why shouldn't _all_ functions
taking string arguments convert their arguments to strings? What's
different about the concat function. (It's not very different from
string-join for example)

> We have looked at most of the solutions you propose.

I'm not surprised by that:-)


> In my view the right (i.e. least problematic) answer is (2).

If that was the final decision (I accept that yours was a personal
response not a formal group one) I'd be happy to accept that
resolution. The current type system modified as in (2) would still be a
long way from my preferred type system (which would be closer to Xpath
1:-) but given where we are now, it would I think remove many of the
more severe usability problems with the current system.

David

________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________
Received on Tuesday, 20 April 2004 08:19:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:19 UTC