- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 08:07:55 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3842 ------- Comment #3 from mike@saxonica.com 2006-10-18 08:07 ------- No, I don't think there's any uncertainty. The sentence clearly describes a relation between variables, not between variable names. The fact that two variables can have the same name is completely irrelevant. A more pendantic definition might be A variable binding $x "depends on" a variable binding $y or a function f2 if a variable reference bound to $y or a function call bound to f2 appears in the initializing expression of $x. A function f1 "depends on" a variable binding $y or a function f2 if a variable reference bound to $y or a function call bound to f2 appears in the body of f1. If a variable binding depends on itself by any combination of direct or transitive dependencies, a static error is raised [XQST0054]. ... but I would have thought any reader capable of understanding that would also understand the text that Don proposed. Michael, we are trying very hard at the moment to close out the last few issues and get the specs finished. Technically, we closed to new comments months ago, but we are still keeping the lists open so that serious errors can be reported. We can't keep wordsmithing for ever: there are people who want these specs finished.
Received on Wednesday, 18 October 2006 08:08:06 UTC