- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 11:18:31 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9252 --- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> 2010-03-16 11:18:31 --- With regard to the last remark, it seems by following the link to "equivalence of atomic values" that the unstated intent is perhaps: * Both the "switch operand" and the "case operands" should be atomized, and cast to string if they are untypedAtomic. * In both cases, a type error is raised if the value contains more than one item. * No type error is raised if the values are not comparable; they are treated as not equal. The referenced rules for "equivalence of atomic values" don't really fit properly, because they assume the rules are being used in the context of grouping. For example, there's nothing that explicitly states what collation is used; it's left to the reader to work out that it can only possibly be the default collation from the static context of the switch expression. Presumably it's reasonable to raise a warning if there is a case clause that can never fire because the types are disjoint. -- 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 Tuesday, 16 March 2010 11:18:33 UTC