- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 22:55:24 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1728 ------- Additional Comments From jmdyck@ibiblio.org 2005-07-20 22:55 ------- (In reply to comment #5) > > The normalization of [] predicates is mapped to fn:subsequence. Not always. In particular, not for Expr[1+6 div 6]. > The desire to > allow people to get static type reductions in Expr[numeric-literal] was the > main driving scenario to have these static rules. If we widen the rules on > fn:subsequence, it thus also affects [] expressions. Calls to fn:subsequence() resulting from normalization of predicates have a second arg that is either a NumericLiteral, $fs:last, or $fs:position. Given that you've just agreed to generalize fn:subsequence rule 3 to NumericLiteral, the only further effect (on STA for predicates) of simplifying the STA for fn:subsequence() in the suggested way would be to handle $fs:position, and my guess is that you actually *want* cardinality reduction in a case like ancestor::node()[2].
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2005 22:55:29 UTC