- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 17:05:25 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3618 ------- Comment #6 from davidc@nag.co.uk 2006-11-02 17:05 ------- Michael, Thanks for the clarification. I pushed back on the word "position" as it was only originally introduced with respect to comparing a possible score() function with the existing position() function, but anyway I think we all understand each other now, so I'll let that drop. Since I re-opened the report I suppose I should state how I think it could be resolved. Possibly unwisely my original report raised two interconnected issues. 1) asking for an editorial clarification on the description of the differences between the two variants of let score clause (with or without the main let variable) The WG resolved that by removing one of the forms, which wasn't the resolution I expected, but that's fine by me. 2) Asking for a score syntax (possibly but not necessarily a score function) usable in XPath (including the XPath subset of XQuery, but especially usable in non-xquery contexts). My (currently) preferred solution to this second point would have been to add a score() function, but as I indicated in the original comment, I didn't expect that the WGs would really want to make such a large change at this point, so a fallback position was to add the let score clause to XPath (as extended by full text) once the definition of let score had been clarified as requested in the first part of the comment. My understanding of the WG position is that they have resolved point 1, but decided to take no action on point 2. As such I think that FIXED is an incorrect state for the report and it should be WONTFIX or (preferably) LATER. David
Received on Thursday, 2 November 2006 17:05:37 UTC