[Bug 10073] Problems with the definitions of the trigonometric functions (math:)

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10073





--- Comment #14 from dnovatchev@gmail.com  2010-07-14 17:47:32 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> > 2. exp2 and exp10 are quite redundant with pow and powr. I think that it would
> > be better if instead of these two functions we have pown m n, where both m and
> > n are positive integers.
> I'd assume (I think) exp was defined for non integer values?

If so, then exp2 and exp10 are redundant with powr. Though it seems to me that
2^x and 10^x where x is non-integer would be of limited use.

> > 
> > 3. Why we still don't have or() and and() ? Aren't these much more important
> > than the various trigonometric and exponential functions? Why is this hole in
> > the document?
> It's a lot easer for the user to define function or(a,b) to be a or b than to
> define log. So it seems to me clearly more useful for log to be in the standard
> than or (if only one is in).


The question is not what is easier but what is more important. or() and and()
are fundamental, necessary and most commonly used. They will need to be used as
function objects much more frequently than other functions.

Also, why we have a not() function but we lack or() and and() ?

Following the logic that not() can easily be defined by the user, let us then
be consistent and remove not() as one of the XPath functions.

Dimitre

-- 
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 Wednesday, 14 July 2010 17:47:35 UTC