- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:42:54 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6688 --- Comment #3 from Oliver Hallam <oliver@cbcl.co.uk> 2009-03-12 15:42:54 --- I will concede that () is not a desirable result, but am unconvinced that it is not a valid result. And indeed XQTS is intended to test for conformity, not reasonability. Whether or not this is allowed by the spec hinges on whether this is considered a cardinality constraint: XQuery 2.3.4: "There is an exception to this rule: If a processor evaluates an operand E (wholly or in part), then it is required to establish that the actual value of the operand E does not violate any constraints on its cardinality. For example, the expression $e eq 0 results in a type error if the value of $e contains two or more items. A processor is not allowed to decide, after evaluating the first item in the value of $e and finding it equal to zero, that the only possible outcomes are the value true or a type error caused by the cardinality violation. It must establish that the value of $e contains no more than one item." As I interpret this rewriting "treat as ()" as "()" is (barely) admissible since this does not require its argument to be evaluated. Under static typing any non-trivial expression that can only take the value () raises an XPST0005 error, so under static typing this error is certainly a reasonable (if not the only correct) result. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 12 March 2009 15:43:03 UTC