- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 07:05:59 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9758 Summary: Group By Clause: Equivalence: GroupingSpec Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT Version: Working drafts Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: XQuery 1.1 AssignedTo: jonathan.robie@redhat.com ReportedBy: jmdyck@ibiblio.org QAContact: public-qt-comments@w3.org [Reiterates part of point #2 from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xsl-query/2009Nov/0075.html (Members only)] Re the definition of "equivalence of two atomic values"... In a definition whose "parameters" appear to be merely two values, it's odd to have one of the rules suddenly talk about a GroupingSpec. And while it could maybe slide by if 'equivalence' were only used for 'group by', it's now used by Switch too, so talk of GroupingSpec makes no sense. I tried to find a solution involving just changes of wording, but it was ugly. (The problem is that a GroupingSpec might or might not specify a collation, and a Switch never specifies a collation.) So I think we should turn equivalence into an actual pseudo-function, with a third parameter, C, which is an optional collation. -- 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, 18 May 2010 07:06:03 UTC