- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 13:19:50 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10074
Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> 2010-07-13 13:19:50 ---
WG response:
There are two questions here:
(a) there is a lack of editorial logic in having underpinning functions for
some operators but not others. This is essentially an editorial issue, and at
the moment we don't feel we have the resources to make improvements in this
area.
(b) should the op: functions be exposed as a public interface? The WG feeling
on this is that if we had intended them as a public interface, we would have
designed them differently, and we do not currently see a compelling need for
user-visible functions at this level, especially as it is easy for a user to
add a function as a wrapper around the operator.
--
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 Tuesday, 13 July 2010 13:19:56 UTC