- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 22:19:47 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1728 jmdyck@ibiblio.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | ------- Additional Comments From jmdyck@ibiblio.org 2005-07-20 22:19 ------- [Coming in from Bug 1766...] (In reply to comment #2) > static typing implementations ... would have to be extended to also > reduce cardinality in the much less likely case of Expr[1+6 div 6]. Expr[1+6 div 6] doesn't entail a call to fn:subsequence, so how is it relevant to STA of fn:subsequence? And I don't understand why static typing implementations would have to be 'extended'. It seems to me that going from having to ask "Is the 2nd arg a 1 or $fs:last?" to "Is the 2nd arg an expr?" (Duh!) is a simplification, not an extension.
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2005 22:19:50 UTC