W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > June 2007

[Bug 4719] [FT] editorial: 3.7 Ignore Option

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 10:09:14 +0000
CC:
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1I22YM-0005oU-JZ@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4719

           Summary: [FT] editorial: 3.7 Ignore Option
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Last Call drafts
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: minor
          Priority: P2
         Component: Full Text
        AssignedTo: jim.melton@acm.org
        ReportedBy: jmdyck@ibiblio.org
         QAContact: public-qt-comments@w3.org


3.7 Ignore Option

[1]
position of section
    Given that an FTIgnoreOption can only occur as part of an
    FTContainsExpr, I think this section should be close to 2.2.

[2]
para 1
"The ignore option specifies a set of nodes whose content are ignored"
    s/content/contents/

[3]
"(see FTContainsExp)"
    s/Exp/Expr/

[4]
"Let N1, N2, ..., Nk be the sequence of nodes of the search context."
    If the search context contains atomic values, this would seem to
    exclude them from the new search context.

[5]
para 2
"Now, let I1, I2, ..., In be the sequence of items that UnionExpr
evaluates to. For each Ni (i=1..k) a copy is made..."
    To get the quantification right, change to:
        For each Ni (i=1...k), let I1, I2, ..., In be the sequence of
        items that UnionExpr evaluates to. A copy of Ni is made...
    It might be even better if you pulled in the stuff about evaluating
    UnionExpr from the preceding para.

[6]
"that is not Ni"
    So "without content ." has no effect?
Received on Saturday, 23 June 2007 10:09:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:33 UTC