RE: [F&O] INF, -INF and NaN - literals?

Then we cannot claim our float and double datatypes are IEEE,
or XML Schema, conformant.

All the best, Ashok
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-qt-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Michael Rys
> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 3:13 AM
> To: Colin Paul Adams; public-qt-comments@w3.org
> Subject: RE: [F&O] INF, -INF and NaN - literals?
> 
> 
> This is a bug in the F&O spec. While you can use INF, -INF 
> and NaN in a schema-validated document such as in 
> value="INF", in XQuery, you need to use the constructor 
> functions as Michael Kay says.
> 
> Best regards
> Michael
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-qt-comments- 
> > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Colin Paul Adams
> > Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 12:23 AM
> > To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
> > Subject: [F&O] INF, -INF and NaN - literals?
> > 
> > 
> > 15.4.2.1 Shows an example:
> > 
> > fn:avg((INF, -INF)) returns NaN.
> > 
> > Are INF, -INF and NaN supposed to be literals of type 
> xs:double, as is 
> > implied by this example (at least, that's the inference I draw)?
> > Because the grammar for literals does not include them.
> > Elsewhwere I can only find mention of them as special string values 
> > for the xs:double constructor.
> > 
> > My XPath parser currently parses these expressions as 
> child::INF etc. 
> > Clearly I have a problem with the interpretation of the grammar.
> > --
> > Colin Paul Adams
> > Preston Lancashire
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Friday, 14 January 2005 11:36:05 UTC