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

RE: [F&O] 7.5.4 fn:substring-before

From: Ashok Malhotra <ashokma@microsoft.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 13:08:14 -0800
Message-ID: <EDB607C8AC991F40BE646533A1A673E8011ABA9A@RED-MSG-42.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Noe Michejda" <noe_michejda@7thportal.pl>, <public-qt-comments@w3.org>

Thank you for your comment.  We agreed to correct both the wording and
the example on 7.5.4 as suggested in the joint WG meeting on Jan 19.
Please let us know if this is satisfactory.

All the best, Ashok

-----Original Message-----
From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-qt-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Noe Michejda
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 1:05 PM
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Subject: [F&O] 7.5.4 fn:substring-before


F&O section 7.5.4 (definition of function fn:substring-before) states:

"If the value of $arg2 is the zero-length string, then the function
returns
the zero-length string."

But later example is given:
"fn:substring-before("Baloney!","") returns "Baloney!". "

Then 7.5.5 fn:substring-after states:

"If the value of $arg2 is the zero-length string, then the function
returns
the value of $arg1."

I think error in definition of fn:substring-before, behavior should be
the
same as in fn:substring-after.
"If the value of $arg2 is the zero-length string, then the function
returns
the value of $arg1."

If definition is correct and example mistaken, I think it is bad idea to
return zero-length string in such case.

Best regards,
Noe Michejda
7th Portal S.C.
Received on Sunday, 25 January 2004 16:12:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:55 UTC