W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > June 2006

[Bug 3171] [XQuery] 3.12.5 Constructor Functions

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:38:36 +0000
CC:
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1FptBE-0002gy-KX@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3171


jmdyck@ibiblio.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|WONTFIX                     |




------- Comment #2 from jmdyck@ibiblio.org  2006-06-12 20:38 -------
I'm not satisfied by that response, as it does not address the particulars of
my original comment -- specifically, the distinction between a function and a
function call. From your response, I still have no idea which you actually
intend. 

> The working groups believed that the use of the term 'equivalence' in the
> second sentence of the definition shouldn't leave much room for
> misunderstanding.

I strongly disagree. Sure, there's no misunderstanding that you're defining an
equivalence (and I never questioned that), but there's certainly still room for
misunderstanding about the things being defined as equivalent.

----

Let me try a different tack. Do you think the definition would mean the same
thing if it said "the semantics of a call to the constructor function ..." ?

If you do, then consider this a request to make that change.

If you don't think it would mean the same thing, then perhaps you understand
the distinction I was making in the original post.
Received on Monday, 12 June 2006 20:39:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:57:12 UTC