[FS] redundancy in static typing of booleans expressions? from Per Bothner on 2004-03-01 (public-qt-comments@w3.org from February 2004)

From: Per Bothner <per@bothner.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 17:02:28 -0800
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Cc: mff@research.att.com
Message-ID: <40428BA4.7010409@bothner.com>

4.6 Logical Expressions / Static Type Analysis
"The logical expressions require that each subexpression have type 
xs:boolean."
Isn't this always trivially true, since Expr1 and Expr2 are
post-normalization and so are actually fn:boolean(Expr1}
and fn:boolean(Expr2).

Parhaps adding a parenthetical remark:
(This is always the case after normalization.)
-- 
	--Per Bothner
per@bothner.com   http://per.bothner.com/

Received on Sunday, 29 February 2004 20:02:30 UTC