W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > April 2013

[Bug 21634] format-number() suffix definition seems wrong

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 14:02:01 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-21634-523-dwDAA5xvj8@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21634

Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
           Severity|normal                      |minor

--- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> ---
Actually the problem is subtly different from the way you describe it. The
definition states: "The <var>fractional part</var> of the sub-picture is
defined as the part that appears to the right of the
<var>decimal-separator-sign</var> if there is one; it is a zero-length string
otherwise.

So there is always a fractional part; the problem is (a) the statement that it
is a zero-length string if there is no decimal-separator-sign, and (b) the
subsequent assumption that it contains at least one active character.

So I think 

(a) we should change the definition so instead of "it is a zero-length string
otherwise", we say "or the part that appears to the right of the rightmost
active character otherwise", and add "The fractional part may be zero-length". 

(b) The problem that the fractional part may contain no active characters is
then best dealt with by accepting your suggested wording: The suffix is set to
contain all passive characters to the right of the rightmost active character
in the the sub-picture.

I believe that these changes are editorial, in the sense that there is not
really any alternative interpretation of what is written that would give
different results. I have therefore classified the bug as "minor" and am
resolving it as described here.

Paul, if you agree, please mark the issue closed, otherwise reopen and the full
WG will look at it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2013 14:02:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:52 UTC