- 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