- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 10:49:39 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4719
jmdyck@ibiblio.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |
------- Comment #3 from jmdyck@ibiblio.org 2008-02-16 10:49 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> Fixed, as part of fixes to 4728 or as editorial changes as suggested.
The phrases
each item Ni (i=1..k)
and
If Ni is not a node,
indicate that it doesn't have to be a node, so in the phrase
let N1, N2, ..., Nk be the sequence of nodes that UnionExpr evaluates to
"nodes" should presumably be changed to "items".
Note that you could say something like
let N1, N2, ..., Nk be the nodes in the sequence of items
that UnionExpr evaluates to
and then subsequently know that Ni is a node.
"omits each item Ni (i=1..k) that is not Ij"
The "that is not Ij" part doesn't agree with fts:reconstruct.
I think fts:reconstruct's interpretation is less surprising.
"If Ni is not a node, it is ignored, as "is" does not apply to non-nodes."
The second part is kind of a non-sequitur. I'm guessing you're talking
about XQuery's "is" operator, but there isn't a use of it nearby. And
even if there were, it wouldn't really explain much. I suggest just
ending the sentence at "is ignored".
> Point [1] was considered at F2F 2008-01-24 and we declined to do so, on the
> grounds that FTIgnoreOption is not a core feature.
Hm. Well, looking at 5.2.13 and 5.2.14, it seems that FTIgnoreOption and
Scoring are about equivalent in their core-ness, but that doesn't prevent 2.3
Score Variables from being close to section 2.2.
Look at it this way: syntactically, FTIgnoreOption is not part of FTSelection,
it's part of FTContainsExpr. So [3.7 Ignore Option] doesn't belong in [3
Full-Text Selections], it belongs in [2.2 Full-Text Contains Expression].
Received on Saturday, 16 February 2008 10:49:46 UTC