- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 06:21:46 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4189 ------- Comment #1 from jmdyck@ibiblio.org 2007-11-04 06:21 ------- I agree on all three points: #1) In 8.1.10, the definition of the 'union interpretation' judgment appears to only work correctly when the input type is the "root" of a type hierarchy. #2) 8.1.9 / Semantics / rule 2 needs a 'restricts' counterpart, though I'm not certain the two rules should be as similar as you say. #3) In 8.1.9 / Semantics / rule 3 / premise 2, "extends" should be "restricts".
Received on Sunday, 4 November 2007 06:21:56 UTC