W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > June 2015

[Bug 28845] fn:format-number, formatting rules for exponential notation

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 11:40:38 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-28845-523-koYuKdoiJ1@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28845

Christian Gruen <christian.gruen@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Component|Functions and Operators 3.1 |XQuery 3 & XPath 3 Test
                   |                            |Suite
           Assignee|mike@saxonica.com           |oneil@saxonica.com

--- Comment #2 from Christian Gruen <christian.gruen@gmail.com> ---
Thanks for helping me through. I now agree with you that 5b and 5c should
indeed be sufficient to choose mantissa and exponent. I was mostly confused by
the test results, and also the varying uses of 'mantissa' [1].

I have recategorized this as a test suite bug, and it is about test case
"numberformat135":

  fn:format-number(0.2, '#.e9')

I would expect "0e0" as result:

* according to 5b and 5c, (0.2, 0) must be chosen for (M, E)
* format-number(0,'#.') returns '0'

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Significand#Use_of_.22mantissa.22

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2015 11:40:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 24 June 2015 11:40:41 UTC