- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 21:00:40 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3097 ------- Comment #2 from frans.englich@telia.com 2006-04-10 21:00 ------- Taking into the resolution of #2559, and assuming Rys' suggestion in this report is accepted, the remaining usages of FORG0006 is in F&O, more specifically the functions fn:avg(), fn:max(), fn:min() and fn:sum(), as far as I can tell. When FORG0006 is raised in those cases, it is as type errors. What distinguishes the functions are their special typing rules; conversions that are invoked, and that the sequence types of their arguments can't be expressed with conventional sequence type syntax. If an argument to a function not listed above, does not match as per sequence type matching, XPTY0004 is raised(as per 3.1.5 Function Calls in XQuery, for example). What makes the functions above special is that their typing rules are not conventional, but it's still typing rules, especially from a user's perspective, as I see it. Phrased differently, if changing fn:boolean() to issue XPTY0004 instead of FORG0006 due to "it would be more consistent with other type errors"(Rys), I think one could apply the same reasoning to making the same change to the above functions. I think fn:boolean() is a more important and more central case than the aggregation functions, but perhaps at least worth consideration. One can as always balance the gain of the result against the other implications of changing the specifications at this stage, but perhaps it's not so big if fn:boolean() is to be changed anyway. Regards, Frans
Received on Monday, 10 April 2006 21:00:52 UTC