- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 21:03:28 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3326 ------- Comment #4 from david_marston@us.ibm.com 2006-06-15 21:03 ------- In general, attempting a strict reading of anything about xsl:number in the 1.0 spec is begging to find gaps, but I admit that there is no gap here. I don't think xsl:number deserves to have preservation of 1.0 behavior as the top priority, but that's the WG's call. (If preservation of 1.0 were not the top priority, I would have the error in this situation, allow generated 0 values for level=multiple at least, etc., etc.) So I say this resolution is "grudgingly acceptable" based on the premise that it's acceptable for inadequate format strings to produce non-useful results. Take the strange-looking result as a gentle error message.
Received on Thursday, 15 June 2006 21:03:38 UTC