W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > May 2009

[Bug 6871] [FO] Erronneous value comparison operator mapping for xs:time?

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 09:15:15 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1M5Fz9-0003M2-KU@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6871





--- Comment #2 from Bogdan Butnaru <bogdanb+w3c+bugzilla@gmail.com>  2009-05-16 09:15:15 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> >However I'm not sure the mapping in the XQuery spec is what is intended: Using
> that mapping, two xs:time values that should be incomparable
> 
> All xs:time values are comparable using these operators. Timezone differences
> are handled by applying the implicit timezone.

You're right, I'm sorry. This part of my report should be disregarded. I think
I had mixed up the XQuery and XML Schema specs.

> I'm not absolutely sure whether the two possible definitions of the operators
> are equivalent, for example whether not($s lt $t) is always equivalent to ($s
> eq $t or $s gt $t), but to avoid depending on this we should be consistent in
> how it's defined.

They are equivalent whenever the operators create a total order. IIRC, xs:times
with and without timezones are not totally ordered in the sense of XML Schema,
but they are totally ordered with respect to the XQuery gt/lt/eq operators. The
implicit timezone bridges the two “ordering domains”. That's what confused
my original report.

Should the original description be edited, or are these comments enough?


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 16 May 2009 09:15:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:14:57 GMT