- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 10:53:09 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4271 ------- Comment #3 from frans.englich@telia.com 2007-02-23 10:53 ------- Here's my take on this. For the expression: empty((1, 2) + ()) Two possible outcomes are conformant behavior: * That it evaluates to the boolean value true. This is by that the right operand is evaluated first(and it only). The cardinality error in the left operand is not discovered and the arithmetic expression evaluates to the empty sequence. * The left operand is evaluated first and a type error, XPTY0004, is raised. This is governed by 3.4 which states how each operand is treated, but also that "The order in which the operands are evaluated is implementation-dependent." If I'm not mistaken, K-NumericAdd-38 has the text baseline "true" and the error baseline XPTY0004 to accommodate this. So I don't see that the specs needs to be changed for this, it's sufficiently covered. But unfortunately, error reporting continues to be a tricky and blurry area, and I doubt editorial touches would help.
Received on Friday, 23 February 2007 10:53:24 UTC