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

FW: [F&O] CER-07 exactly-one et al

From: Ashok Malhotra <ashokma@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 10:50:38 -0800
Message-ID: <EDB607C8AC991F40BE646533A1A673E801A58B16@RED-MSG-42.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <public-qt-comments@w3.org>
Cc: <mary@cerisent.com>

Resending.  Did not make it to the archive.

All the best, Ashok

-----Original Message-----
From: Ashok Malhotra 
Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 3:33 PM
To: 'mary@cerisent.com'
Subject: RE: [F&O] CER-07 exactly-one et al

Mary:
Thanks for your comment.  There has been a great deal of discussion over
these functions and there is a significant section of the WG that really
wants them.  Unless you insist, I would rather not reopen this
discussion.

Is that OK?

All the best, Ashok

-----Original Message-----
From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-qt-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mary Holstege
Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2004 11:30 AM
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Subject: [F&O] CER-07 exactly-one et al



F&O 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.1.3

The functions fn:zero-or-one, fn:one-or-more, and fn:exactly-one can
trivially
be written as user functions and provide little benefit. Given widely
useful
functions such as value-union that are not being provided, there seems
little
justification to require these functions. Suggest they be removed.
Received on Monday, 29 March 2004 13:52:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:56 UTC