RE: F&O Table summarizing accessor functions

I guess it depends what you mean by "accepts".  As I understand it the
base-uri function _accepts_ those node types, it just isn't very useful
for them since it returns the empty sequence.  

While we're on the subject, I think the current wording for the base-uri
function is confusing.  At the end of the first paragraph, it says "The
base-uri of all other node types is the empty sequence", "other" meaning
not document, element or PI nodes.   

Someone not reading this closely might interpret that as saying that the
base-uri function returns the empty sequence for those "other" node
types.   This is not true of text and comment nodes that have parents,
as explained in the next paragraph.  I think that sentence can be
removed.

Thanks,
Priscilla


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Rys [mailto:mrys@microsoft.com] 
> Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 1:05 PM
> To: Ashok Malhotra; Priscilla Walmsley; public-qt-comments@w3.org
> Subject: RE: F&O Table summarizing accessor functions
> 
> 
> Are you sure that base-uri is defined on attribute nodes and -- in the
> XPath case -- on namespace nodes?
> 
> Thanks
> Michael
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ashok Malhotra [mailto:ashokma@microsoft.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2003 13:08 PM
> > To: Priscilla Walmsley; public-qt-comments@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: F&O Table summarizing accessor functions
> > 
> > 
> > Fixed.  Thanks!
> > 
> > All the best, Ashok
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org 
[mailto:public-qt-comments-
> > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Priscilla Walmsley
> > Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2003 5:54 AM
> > To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
> >
> >
> > In the table summarizing accessor functions (Section 2):
> >
> > 1. It says that the data function accepts "zero or more nodes".
This
> > should now say "zero or more items".
> >
> > 2. It says that the base-uri function accepts "Element, document or
PI
> > node or no argument".  This should now say "zero or one node of any
> > kind".
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Priscilla
> >
>

Received on Sunday, 11 May 2003 14:32:06 UTC